Skip to main content

Full text of "Intracoastal waterway, Boston, Mass. to Beaufort, N.C. Section"

STEPHEN Bo WEEKS 

CLASS OF 1886; PHD. THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 



A 



OF THE 

THE WEEKS COS 

©F 



'LUECTION 



3U 



X58w8 




This book must not 
be taken from the 
Library building. 



Form No. 471 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2014 



https://archive.org/details/intracoastalwate2ndunit 



62 2dSesTon S } HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES { D °° u ™ 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY 

BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 
SECTION 



LETTER FROM 
THE SECRETARY OF WAR 

TRANSMITTING 

WITH A LETTER FROM THE CHIEF OF 
ENGINEERS, REPORT ON SURVEY OF THE 
BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C, SEC- 
TION OF THE PROPOSED CONTINUOUS 
INLAND WATERWAY FROM BOSTON, MASS., 
TO THE RIO GRANDE 



January 5, 1912. — Referred to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors and 
ordered to be printed, with illustrations 



WASHINGTON 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFEIOE 
1912 



LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 



War Department, 
Washington, January 4, 1912. 

Sir : I have the honor to transmit herewith a letter from the Chief 
of Engineers, United States Army, dated 2d instant, together with 
copy of report by a special board of Engineer officers, dated October 
4, 1911, with maps, of a survey of that section of the proposed con- 
tinuous inland waterway from Boston, Mass., to the Rio Grande, 
from Boston, Mass., to Beaufort, N. C, made in compliance with a 
provision contained in the river and harbor act of March 3, 1909. 
Very respectfully, 

H. L. Stimson, 
Secretary of War. 

The Speaker of the House of Representatives. 



REPORT ON INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY— BOSTON, 
MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C, SECTION. 



War Department, 
Office of the Chief of Engineers, 

Washington, January 2, 1912. 

Sir: L I have the honor to forward herewith, for transmission to 
Congress, a report dated October 4, 1911, prepared by a special board 
of Engineer officers in accordance with a provision contained in the 
river and harbor act approved March 3, 1909, as follows: 

Sec. 13. * * * The Secretary of War is hereby authorized and directed to 
cause preliminary examinations and surveys to be made at the localities named in this 
section, as hereinafter set forth. 

* * * * * * 

Survey for the construction of a continuous waterway, inland where practicable, 
from Boston, Massachusetts, to Long Island Sound including a waterway from the 
protected waters of Narragansett Bay through the ponds and lagoons lying along the 
southern coast of Rhode Island to Watch Hill and Fishers Island ; thence to New York 
Bay; thence across the State of New Jersey to a suitable point on Delaware River or 
Bay; thence to Chesapeake Bay; thence from Norfolk, Virginia, to the sounds of 
North Carolina and Beaufort Inlet, North Carolina, for the purpose of ascertaining the 
cost of a channel with a maximum depth of twenty-five feet, or such lesser depths 
along any section or sections of the said waterway as may be found to be sufficient for 
commercial, naval, or military purposes. Such survey shall include an examination 
of all practicable routes, the preparation of plans and estimates of cost along the most 
available route, and a report upon the desirability of utilizing as a part of such water- 
way any existing public or private canal, or any part thereof, and the probable cost of 
acquiring the same. 

, 2. The report of this special board has been referred, as required by 
law, to the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, to whose 
report herewith, dated December 12, 1911, attention is invited. 

3. After careful consideration of these reports and in accordance 
with the instructions of Congress, I report upon this subject that I 
concur in general with the views expressed by the Board of Engineers 
for Rivers and Harbors, and that I deem advisable at the present 
time the adoption of projects as follows: 

First. The construction of a waterway 12 feet deep between 
Norfolk, Va., and Beaufort Inlet, N. C, at a total cost, in round 
numbers, of $5,400,000, itemized as follows: 

12-foot depth. 



Norfolk to Albemarle Sound : Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route $2, 735, 000 

Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound: Rose Bay route 2, 215, 000 

Brant Shoal Cut 55, 000 

Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Inlet: Via Adams Creek Canal 395, 000 



Total for 12-foot depth 5, 400, 000 



3 



4 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The amount estimated for the section from Norfolk to Albemarle 
Sound includes $500,000 for the purchase of the existing Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal and $2,235,000 for its improvement and increase in 
depth to 12 feet; and an immediate appropriation of $735,000 for 
such purchase and commencement of work with authorization of 
$2,000,000 additional to secure 12-foot depth, is recommended. 

Subsequent to the enactment of the law which provided for this 
survey the Secretary of War was authorized by the act of June 25, 
1910, to make a contract for the purchase of either the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal or the Dismal Swamp Canal, subject to future 
ratification and appropriation by Congress. It was further provided 
"that no contract for the purchase of either of said canals shall be 
made unless such purchase, after full hearing of all parties in interest, 
is recommended in the survey report to be hereafter submitted in 
compliance with the directions of Congress in the river and harbor act 
approved March 3, 1909." Since all parties in interest have had full 
hearing and since the purchase of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal 
is recommended in this survey report, a recommendation will be 
promptly made by me to the Secretary of War that a contract be 
entered into for the purchase of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, 
subject to future ratification and appropriation by Congress as pro- 
vided for in the act of June 25, 1910. The purchase of this canal and 
the freeing of the present commerce between Norfolk and Albemarle 
Sound of the tolls now charged will of itself alone be of considerable 
aid to commerce. It is recommended that the improvement of the 
entire section from Norfolk, Va., to Beaufort Inlet, N. C, be com- 
menced as soon as title to the canal property has been obtained by 
the United States with a view to the completion of the 12-foot depth 
over the entire route within six years. 

Second. The immediate purchase of the existing Chesapeake & 
Delaware Canal, which connects Chesapeake Bay with the Delaware 
River, at an estimated cost of $2,514,290, and its progressive change 
to a tide-level canal of 25 feet depth at mean low water at a further 
cost of $9,910,210, making a total initial cost of $12,424,500, of which 
$3,000,000 should be made available immediately, and the rest be 
covered by authorizations with a view to final completion, following 
the general line of improvement outlined by the special board. This 
canal forms an essential part of a through inland waterway connect- 
ing New York and Philadelphia with the South. Its purchase and 
the abolishment of tolls will produce at once a considerable saving 
in transportation expenses and should result in an early and sub- 
stantial increase of traffic with advantage to the commerce of several 
States. This canal is at present 10 feet deep and of the lock type, 
the locks being 24 feet wide by 220 feet long. The change should 
be made gradually and in such way as to interfere as little as possible 
with existing traffic; and 12 feet depth or thereabout should be 
secured throughout the canal before the deepening is carried to 25 
feet. While the above recommendation for immediate purchase of 
this canal and the enlargement of this section to about 12 feet depth 
is a definite recommendation, the method of deepening to 25 feet and 
the rapidity of work for the first and subsequent deepening must 
depend considerably upon the cost of the intermediate steps, and 
further estimates for such portions of the work will therefore be called 
for and submitted later with final recommendation for this section. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 5 

4. The special board recommended the construction of a sea-level 
canal 25 feet deep across the State of New Jersey between the Dela- 
ware River and Raritan Bay at a cost estimated at $45,000,000. 
To aid in carrying out this project the State of New Jersey has under- 
taken to provide not to exceed $500,000 for purchase of right of way 
for the canal. The special board stated, however, that the con- 
struction of the canal recommended should be deferred until after 
the construction of the two more southerly sections (Delaware- 
Chesapeake and Norfolk-Beaufort sections), and until the necessary 
plant now at work on the Panama Canal shall be made available. 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors states that it is 
not convinced that a canal of much less depth than 25 feet would not 
adequately meet the demands of commerce, and believes that esti- 
mates of cost of a canal 12 feet deep should be made. Orders have 
been already issued that such estimates be prepared and that the 
subject of improvement of this portion of the proposed waterway 
be further considered. After such estimates have been received 
and considered, my recommendations as to this portion of the route 
will be submitted. This development will be of so great direct local 
benefit to the State of New Jersey that a liberal contribution from 
such State seems proper in addition to its supply of the right of way. 

5. With respect to the section of the through route between Fishers 
Island and New York Bay, it may be stated that the conditions affect- 
ing navigation are such that that section is in its natural condition 
practically a sheltered inland waterway of ample capacity for all the 
traffic that will ever use it except at the western end where certain 
obstructions exist which are being removed under projects now in 
effect and for which any needed further improvement will be recom- 
mended in a report to be made in compliance with another item of 
the act of March 3, 1909, which provided for an examination of 
"East River including Little Hell Gate." 

6. For the section between Narragansett Bay and Long Island 
Sound, the special board recommended the construction of a canal 
18 feet deep between Fishers Island Sound and Bissells Cove, Narra- 
gansett Bay, with an additional entrance 18 feet deep just north of 
Narragansett Pier at an estimated cost of $12,322,000, but stated 
that the full benefit to be derived from the construction of this canal 
can be obtained only on the completion of the sections to the south, 
and that the initiation of the work should follow that on the New 
Jersey section. The State of Rhode Island has undertaken to pro- 
vide a free right of way for the canal as far as can be provided with 
an appropriation of $500,000. The Board of Engineers for Rivers 
and Harbors states that it is very questionable whether the inside 
route would be used sufficiently to warrant the large expenditure 
required for its construction and maintenance and that it is not 
advisable to commit the Government at this time to a definite pro- 
ject for the execution of this work. I concur with the views of the 
Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, and as required by law 
express my opinion that it is not advisable for the Government to 
undertake the construction of this link of the proposed waterway at 
the present time. 

7. For the section of the proposed waterway between Boston and 
Narragansett Bay the special board prepared approximate estimates 
for canals starting at Narragansett Bay; one was for a canal 18 feet 



6 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



in depth via Taunton and Plymouth to cost about $17,500,000 and 
another for a canal 25 feet in depth via Taunton and Hingham to 
cost about $40,000,000, and also considered the advisability of the 
purchase by the United States at this time of a canal now being con- 
structed by nrivate parties to connect Buzzards Bay with Cape Cod 
Bay which will shorten materially the distance between Long Island 
Sound and Boston. A commission appointed by the State of Massa- 
chusetts "to consider in what manner the Commonwealth may best 
cooperate with the Federal Government and certain other States 
in the development of inland waterways," has reported that "The 
conditions of transportation may so change in the future as to make 
such a canal desirable and necessary, but the facts as they now appear 
do not warrant this commission in advocating the present construc- 
tion of the proposed canal." I concur with the views of the special 
board and the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors that at 
the present time there is no commercial necessity sufficient to justify 
the construction of a canal over either of the inland routes above 
mentioned, and that it is not considered by me advisable for the 
United States to undertake at this time the construction of such a 
canal or to enter into negotiations for acquisition of the Cape Cod 
Canal now in course of construction by private parties. 

8. Attention is invited to the remarks of the special board as to the 
desirability of such legislative or municipal action as will insure the 
preservation of suitable sites for terminal facilities free from monopoly 
and the cooperation of transportation companies operating by rail and 
by water, the remarks of the board on this subject being as follows: 

Similarly, it has been a policy of the railway companies to obtain possession as far 
as possible of all available wharf space in terminal cities, partly with a view to prevent- 
ing competition. The recent movement toward providing adequate public wharf 
space in the cities will counteract this evil. Further, in many cases railways* have 
been so operated as to throw obstacles in the way of dividing a long-distance carriage 
between rail and water, and thus to make an all-rail carriage most advantageous. 
This has been done by increasing the difficulties and costs of transfer between the rail 
and water carriers, by refusing to make or honor through bills of lading over mixed 
rail and water routes, or by making charges for short hauls by rail for distribution from 
water terminals prohibitively high. Since the raiiways are quasi-public institutions, 
owing their possibility of existence to important public rights granted by law, it is 
certain that a policy of this kind which is manifestly contrary to the public interests 
must eventually be changed. Until action has been taken by the Nation and States 
which will insure cooperation between transportation companies operating by rail 
and by water and thus provide for the interchange of commerce at the minimum of 
expense to the public, the full benefits to be obtained from the improvement of water- 
ways can not be had, and the benefits received must be measured mainly by the low- 
ering ol rail freight rates to favored communities located on water routes. 

Very respectfully, 

W. H. Bixby, 
Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army. 

The Secretary of War. 
[For report of Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, see p. 268.] 



TABLE OF CONTENTS AND INDEX OF REPORT ON BOSTON- 
BEAUFORT INLET DIVISION PROPOSED INTRACOASTAL WATER- 
WAY. 



CONTENTS. 

Page. 

Letter of transmittal 2 

I. Acts of Congress and special orders, Office of the Chief of Engineers 3, 19 

River and harbor act, approved March 3, 1909, section 13 3, 19 

Departmental ruling 20 

River and harbor act, approved June 25, 1910, section 1, relative 

to Boston-Beaufort Inlet division 3 

Special order No. 10, Office of the Chief of Engineers, March 8, 1909, 

paragraph 1 19 

II. Conclusions 21 

Boston-Narragansett Bay section 21,28 

Narragansett Bay- Long Island Sound section 22 

New York Bay-Delaware River section 22, 36 

Delaware River-Chesapeake Bay section 23, 85 

Norfolk-Beaufort Inlet section 23, 100 

III. General remarks on freight transportation 23 

IV. General remaiks on military value of the proposed waterways 26 

V. General remarks 27 

Railroad and highway crossings 27 

Widening of cross sections at curves 27 

Reasons for board's recommendations to be found in detail report for 

each section 27 

Conditions which lead the board to recommend the immediate con- 
struction of the two southern sections 28 

VI. Boston-Narragansett Bay section, report in detail 28 

VII. Narragansett Bay-Long Island Sound section, report in detail 36 

VIII. New York Bay-Delaware River section, report in detail 51-84 

IX. Delaware River-Chesapeake Bay section, report in detail 85 

X. Norfolk-Beaufort Inlet section, report in detail 100 

XI. Report of the Commission on Inland Waterways on a free ship canal con- 
necting Boston and Narragansett Bay (Appendix A 1) 135 

XII. Report of transportation committee of the Providence Board of Trade on 
the commercial value of the proposed intracoastal waterway to Rhode 

Island (Appendix B 1) 153 

Letter from Hon. A. J. Pothier, governor of Rhode Island, to the honor- 
able the general assembly, January 24, 1911 (Appendix B 2) 159 

XIII. Formula deduced from experiments for increased width necessary on 

curves in canal construction (Appendix C 1) 160 

Table of commercial statistics on the navigable waterways and the 
population and manufacturing statistics of the principal cities tribu- 
tary to the New York Bay-Delaware River section of the proposed 

intracoastal waterway (Appendix C 2) 162 

Report of the committee on traffic of the proposed intracoastal waterway 

connecting New York and Delaware Bays (Appendix C 3) 175 

Resolution of the State of New Jersey (Appendix C 4) 226 

Statements from commercial bodies interested in the construction of the 

proposed intracoastal waterway (Appendix C 5) 227 

Special report, Board of Trade, Camden, N. J. (Appendix C 6) 231 

Special report, New York, Produce Exchange (Appendix C 7) 236 

Special report, Trenton Chamber of Commerce (Appendix C 8) 239 

Special report of Board of Trade of the City of Newark, N.J. (Appendix 

C9) i 246 

7 



8 TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Page. 

XIV. Letter from Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co., June 14, 1911 (Appen- 
dix D 1) 247 

Letter from Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co., July 12, 1911 (Appendix 

D 2). 248 

Letters from Baltimore & Philadelphia Steamboat Co., Philadelphia, 
January 31, 1911; River & Harbor Improvement Co. (contractors), 
Philadelphia, Pa., January 31, 1911;andJ.B.Blodes Lumber Co., New- 

bern, N. C., March, 1911 (Appendix D 3) 248 

XV. Stenographic report of public hearing held at Norfolk, Va., September 

6, 1911 (Appendix E) 249 



INDEX. 

KEY. 

B oston-Narr agansett B ay section A 

Narragansett Bay-Long Island Sound section B 

New York Bay-Delaware River section C 

Delaware River-Chesapeake Bay section D 

Norfolk-Beaufort Inlet section E 

Page. 

Acts of Congress 3, 19, 20 

Adams Creek route (E) 23, 100 

Agricultural products (Table 20, Appendix C 3) 193 

Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound subdivision (E) 121-129 

Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route (E) 23, 112-113 

Amsterdam Canal, allowable speed in 75 

Back Creek route (D) 85, 89 

Barge rates v. rail rates (Appendix C 3, p. 177) 177 

Breach ways into ponds (B) 43 

Board's conclusions 21 

Borings: 

A 32,33,34 

B 36 

C 56 

D 89,90,92 

E 113 

Boston -Narragansett Bay section (A) 21,28-35 

Bibliography 28-30 

Borings.... 32,33,34 

Brockton route 30 

Cape Cod Canal 30, 34-35 

Commerce and dangers of outside route 30-33 

Comparative estimates of different routes examined 35 

Cross section of Boston-Narragansett Bay section 30 

Cross section of Cape Cod Canal 32-35 

Description of Cape Cod Canal 32-35 

Excavation 32 

Geological formation 32, 33 

Jetties 34, 39, 40, 45, 70, 77, 94, 95 

Land damage 30 

Lock-canal project 30-33 

Maintenance 30-34 

North River Valley route 31 

Physical characteristics 31 

Recommendations of board 35 

Report of Massachusetts Commonwealth (Appendix A 1) 20, 21, 135 

Report in detail 19-35 

Right of way 30 

Sailing distances via Cape Cod and via proposed canal route 32 

Slope protection 32 

Surveys and examinations 31 

Taunton-Hingham route 32, 35 

Taunton-Plymouth route 32, 35 

Tidal data 32-35 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 9 

Page. 

Bridges and ferries (B) 41 

Bridges: 

C 61,65,66-67 

D 94-95 

E 105, 106, 107, 122, 123, 124 

Brockton route (A) 30 

Canal: 

Albemarle & Chesapeake (E) 100-102, 105, 109, 110 

Amsterdam, allowable speed in 75 

Cape Cod (A) 30,34-35 

Chesapeake & Delaware (D) 85-89 

Delaware & Raritan (C) 51, 52, 81 

Dismal Swamp (E) 104,109-112,113 

Kiel, allowable speed in 75 

Manchester, allowable speed in 75 

Suez, allowable speed in 75 

Cost of enlarging existing (E) 114, 115 

Statistics of proposed — ■ 

C 76 

D 99-100 

Capacity and speed of boats recommended by commercial bodies interested (C) . 80 

Cape Cod Canal (A) 30, 34-35 

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal (D) 85-89 

Chief function of Rhode Island section (B) 48 

Coal shipments, New York to Philadelphia, Baltimore, Norfolk, and Newport 

News (Table 3, Appendix C 3) 181 

Coal shipments, Philadelphia to coastwise ports (Table 6, Appendix C 3) 182 

Commerce affected: 

A 30-33 

B 46 

C (Appendix C 2) 162 

D 97-98 

E , 116 

Commerce and dangers of outside route (A) 30-33, 129-131 

Comparative cost or building schooners and barges (Table 24, Appendix C 3) 196 

Comparative cost of railways and waterways (C) 80 

Comparative cost of waterways via several routes (E) 109 

Comparative estimates between lock and sea-level canals: 

A 35 

C 59 

E 104-107 

Comparative estimates of different routes examined: 

A 35 

B 45-46 

C 59 

D 94-95 

E 104-107,121-125 

Comparative rail and barge rates (Table 25, Appendix C 3) 197 

Comparison per ton mile rate on coal via rail and via water (B) 49 

Congressional acts 2 

Coopers Creek route (E) 106, 113-114 

Cross section formulae for widening at curves (Appendix CI) 160 

Cross section, widening at curves (C) 75 

Cross section of canal: 

A 31 

B 45-46 

C 61 

D 93 

E 104 

Croatan Sound route (E) 121, 125 

Crystal River route (D) 90, 92 

Dam, movable (C) 68 

Delaware River subdivision (C) 58, 62 



10 INTRACOASTAL WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Page. 

Delaware River-Chesapeake Bay section (D) 23, 85-100 

Alignment 89 

Back Creek route 85 

Borings 89,90 

Bridges 94,95 

Canal statistics 99 

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, history of 85-89 

Commercial statistics 96-99 

Cross section 93 

Crystal River route 90, 92 

Deep Run route 90, 92 

Estimate of cost 94 

Excavation 94 

Geological formation 87,91 

Highway changes 94 

Jetties 94 

Lighting 96 

Land damages 90,95 

Lock canal project 94 

Locks, tidal 94 

Maintenance 95 

Most available route 87 

Purchase of Chesapeake and Delaware Canal (Appendixes D 1 and 

D2) 95,247,248 

Physical characteristics 87 

Report in detail 85-100 

Right of way 95 

Slope protection 94 

Tidal currents 68 

Tidal data 68 

Unit prices 94 

Delaware & Raritan Canal (C) 51 

Dikes : 

C 62 

E 120 

Dismal Swamp Canal route (D) 104, 109-113 

Economic considera' ions of proposed waterway: 

A 27,33 

B 27 

C 78-100 

D 93,96-99 

E 129-131 

Estimate, comparative, between lock and sea-level canal: 

A 35 

C 59 

E 104-107 

Estimate in detail: 

A 35 

B 45-46 

0.1 35 

D 94,95 

E 104-107,121-124,129 

Estimate of cost of sea-level canal, 18 feet and 25 feet: 

A 35 

B 45-46 

G...V."".;.'" 60 

D • 94-95 

Excavation: 

A - 33,34 

B" 45-46 

c.".'.." ;;::*;;;**; 63 

j) 94 95 

E . '.'.'.*.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.".'.'.'.'.....'.. . . . . . i6i-i67i 121-124, 129 

Far Creek route (E) 122, 126 

Fences (C). 69 

Ferry crossing (B) 42 

Formulae for widening at curves (Appendix CI) 160 

Freight cartage at Philadelphia (Appendix C 3) 175 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, W. C. 11 

Page. 

Freight, estimated tonnage through proposed canal: 

B 48 

C 81,85 

E 131 

Freight rate saved by construction of waterway: 

B 47 

C 85 

D 94-95 

E 130,131 

Freight rates via proposed canal, New Jersey section (Appendix C 3) 175 

Freight traffic, classification of (Appendix C 3) 175 

Freight transportation, general remarks on 23 

General conclusions of the "committee on traffic" (Appendix C 3) 175 

General remarks: 

Freight transportation 26, 27 

Military value of proposed waterway 27 

Of board 27 

Geological formation: 

A. .. 34 

B 39 

C 56 

D 87,91,95 

E 114,127 

Ground water lowered. See Land damages (C). 

History of existing canals: 

A! 29,30,34,35 

C .36,37 

D 87,89 

E 100-103,109-112 

Highway bridge: 

B 22,41 

C 65 

D 94,95 

E 104-107,121-125 

Highwav changes: 

B. . 22,41 

C 65 

P 94,95 

Ice interference : 

B > 51 

D 89,95 

Jetties: 

A : : 34 

B 39,40,45 

c. ::v.. . . . i - 1' .vHi ip^rmi: . . ... ... 70, 77 

D 94,95 

Juniper Bay route (E) 123, 126 

Kiel Canal, allowable speed in 75 

Land damages: 

A ziViiiz 30 

B 39 

C 73 

D 90-95 

E j 109 

Lighting: 

B 45,46 

C 53,61 

D 96 

Lock canal project: 

A 32,33 

C 57,58 

D 94 

E 102-103,107 

Locks, tidal: 

C 68 

D 94 

E 108 



12 TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Page. 

Long shoal route (E) 122, 126 

Lumber and timber products in adjacent States (Table 19, Appendix 3) 192 

Massachusetts Commonwealth report (Appendix A 1) 135 

Maintenance: 

A 30-34 

B 46 

C 74 

D 95 

E 118 

Manchester Canal: 

Allowable speed in 75 

Effect of construction on commerce of Liverpool 26 

Manufactures of five industrial districts (Table 16, Appendix C 3) 190 

Members of board 21 

Military value of proposed waterway, general remarks 26 

Movable dam (C) 68 

Narragansett Bay-Long Island Sound section (B) 22, 36 

Amount of commerce affected 22 

Answers to circular letter distributed 49,50 

Borings 36 

Breach ways into ponds 43 

Bridges and ferries 22, 41 

Chief function of Rhode Island section 48 

Comparison per ton-mile rate on coal via water and via rail 47 

Cross section of canal 45, 46 

Description of route selected 36 

Effect of proposed waterway on future shipments 48, 49 

Estimates in detail 45 

Excavation 45 

Freight controlled by railroads between New York and Narragansett Bay, 

reasons for 46-47 

Freight rate saved by construction of waterways 46 

Geological formation 39-41 

Highway change 41-42 

Ice interference 51 

Jetties 39,40,45 

Land damages 39 

Lighting ! 45-46 

Maintenance 46 

Physical characteristics 36 

Present delays to traffic 46 

Railroad changes 42 

Railroad statistics 48 

Report in detail 36-51 

Sailing distance, Providence to Norfolk, via proposed waterway 47 

Slope protection 40 

Statement of Providence Board of Trade 49 

Surveys 36 

Table of highway and railroad crossings 42 

Terminals 44 

Tidal currents 44 

Tidal data 36 

Water power 43 

Naval value of proposed canal (Appendix C 3) 175 

New Jersey: 

Letter from interested bodies (Appendix C 5) 227 

Resolution of the legislature (Appendix C 4) 226 

Local industries in (Appendix C 3) 175 

New York Bay-Delaware River section (C) 22, 36, 51 

Amsterdam Canal, allowable speed in 75 

Borings 52, 55 

Bridges 65 

Canal statistics 76 

Capacity of boats recommended by commercial bodies interested in pro- 
posed waterway 79 

Coal shipment, New York to Philadelphia, Baltimore, Norfolk, and New- 
port News (Appendix C3) 84 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 13 



Page. 

New York Bay-Delaware River section (C) — Continued. 

Comparative cost of railroads and waterways 59 

Comparative estimates between lock and sea-level canal 59 

Cross section 60 

Cross section, widening at curves (Appendix C 1) 160 

Delaware & Raritan Canal, history oi 81 

Delaware River, description of 62 

Delaware River subdivision 58, 62 

Description of route selected 55 

Dikes 62 

Economical consideration 78 

Estimates in detail 77 

Estimated cost of sea-level canal, 18 and 25 feet 60 

Excavation 63 

Fences 69 

Geological formation 56 

Ground water lowered 73 

Highway change 66 

Jetties 70 

Kiel Canal, allowable speed in 75 

Land damage 73 

Length of sheltered waterways tributary to Boston-Beaufort Inlet division 

of canal (Appendix C 2) 162 

Lighting 53,69 

Lock canal project ". 57, 58 

Lock, tidal 68 

Maintenance and operation 74 

Maps 76 

Mechanical installation 70 

Movable dam 68 

New York Bay subdivision 73 

Physical characteristics 51 

Rail tonnage moved across New Jersey 80 

Railroad change 66 

Report in detail 51-84 

Right of way 70 

Siphons 67 

Slope protection '. 68 

Speed of boats in canal 74 

Spoil banks 70 

Statistics of United States Life-Saving Service 81 

Survey made by city of Philadelphia for canal across New Jersey 53 

Tidal currents in canal 59, 60 

Tidal data 60 

Tidal locks 52,53 

Unit prices 77 

Water power: 

Available 73 

Damage 70 

Norfolk-Beaufort Inlet section (E) 23, 100 

Adams Creek route 23, 100, 128 

Albemarle Sound-Pamlico Bay subdivision 121-129 

Albemarle-Chesapeake Canal route * 105-112 

Borings 113 

Commercial necessity of the proposed waterway ^ 29 

Comparative cost of waterways via several routes J 25 

Cooper Creek route , 106, 113, 114 

Cost of enlarging existing canals 114, 115 

Cost of maintenance of the several routes 107, 118 

Cost of purchasing existing canals 107-109 

Croatan Sound route 121, 125 

Cross section 104 

Dikes 120 

Dismal Swamp Canal route 104, 109 

Far Creek route 122,126 

Excavation 104-107, 121-124, 129 

Geological formation 114,127 



14 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Page. 

Norfolk-Beaufort Inlet section (E) — Continued. 

History of existing canals 100-101 

Juniper Bay route 123, 126 

Land damages 109 

Lock canal pro j ect 107 

Locks, tidal 108 

Long Shoal route 122, 126 

Maintenance 118 

Members of board 21 

Modified Pungo River route 124, 127 

New Cooper Creek route 106 

Norfolk to Albemarle Sound subdivision 100 

Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Inlet subdivision 128 

Physical disadvantages of Albemarle Sound Canal 117 

Physical charact eristics 109 

Pungo River route 124, 127 

Recommendation of board and reasons therefor 21-23, 117, 120, 121, 127, 131 

Report in detail 100-131 

Rose Bay route 123, 126 

Route recommended by board 127, 131 

Stenographic notes of public hearing held at Norfolk September 6, 1910 

(Appendix E) 249 

Summary of cost of sea-level canal 107 

Tidal data 107 

Tidal influence on canal 107 

Traffic through existing canals 114 

North River Valley route (A) 31 

Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Inlet subdivision (E) 128 

Physical characteristics : 

A 31 

B. .. 36 

C 51 

D 87 

E 109 

Physical disadvantages of Albemarle Sound Canal 117 

Probable shipment from principal cities tributary to the canal 46 

Production in territories adjacent to proposed canal (Appendix C 3) 175 

Providence Board of Trade, report (B), (Appendixes B-C) 153 

Pungo River route (E) 124, 127 

Pungo River route, modified (E) 124, 127 

Rail and water, comparison per 10-mile rate on coal (B) 49 

Railroad bridges: 

B 41 

C 61 

D 94-95 

Railroad changes: 

B 41 

C 61 

Railroad statistics 48 

Rail tonnage moved across New Jersey 80 

Rail traffic, effect of canal upon 48 

Railways and waterways, comparative cost of 80 

Rail v. barge rates (Appendix 3). ..J 175 

Recommendations of board : 

A 21,28,85 

B 22,35 

C 22,53-55 

D 23, 95 

E 23,117,120,121,127,131 

Report in detail : 

A 19-35 

B 36-51 

C 51-84 

D 85-100 

E 100-131 

Report of commission of Massachusetts Commonwealth (Appendix A 1) 135 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 15 

Page. 

Report of committee on traffic of proposed intracoastal waterway connecting 

New York and Delaware Bay (Appendix B 1) 153 

Report: 

Board of Trade, Camden, N. J. (Appendix C 6) 231 

Board of Trade, City of Newark, N. J. (Appendix C 9) 246 

New York Produce Exchange, New York City (Appendix C 7) _ 236 

Report of transportation committee, Providence Board of Trade (Appendix B 1) 153 

Report of Trenton Chamber of Commerce (Appendix C 8) 239 

Resolutions of New Jersey Senate regarding right of way (Appendix C 4) 226 

Right of way : 

A ; 30 

B 38 

C 70 

D 95 

E 104-107 

Sailing distance, Providence to Norfolk via proposed waterway 47 

Sailing distances via Cape Cod Canal and via proposed canal route 32 

Shipment of coal by water (Table 11, Appendix C 3) 181 

Siphons (C). v 67 

Slope protection: 

A. 32 

B 40 

C 68 

D ' 94 

Speed of boats in canal (C) 74 

Special order No. 10 appointing board 19 

Spoil banks: 

B 40-41 

C 70 

Statistics of industries of Atlantic seaboard States 162 

Statistics of principal cities and towns tributary to Boston-Beaufort Inlet divi- 
sion of proposed intracoastal waterway (Appendix C 2) 162 

Statistics of United States Life Saving Service 81 

Stenographic report of public hearing held at Norfolk, Va., Sept. 6, 1910 

(Appendix E) _ 249 

Suez Canal, allowable speed in 75 

Summary of mines and quarries in adjacent States (Table 18, Appendix C 3). . 187 

Survey made by city of Philadelphia, 1894, for waterway across New Jersey (C) . . 53 
Tables: 

Agricultural products (Table 1, Appendix C 3) 193 

Causes of disasters to vessels on Atlantic and Gulf coast (Table 28, Appen- 
dix C 3) 199 

Classes of vessels lost and damaged on Atlantic and Gulf coast, (Table 27, 

Appendix C 3) 199 

Classification of freight traffic (Table 12, Appendix C 3) 186-187 

Coal shipments, New York to Philadelphia, Baltimore, Norfolk and New- 
port News (Table 3, Appendix C 3) 84 

Coal shipments, Philadelphia to coastwise ports (Table 6, Appendix C 3). . 182 
Commercial statistics on navigable waterways and manufacturing statistics 
of principal cities tributary to proposed intracoastal waterway (Appen- 
dix C 2) 162 

Comparative cost of building schooners and barges (Table 24, Appendix C 3) . 196 

Comparative rail and barge rates (Table 25, Appendix C 3) 197 

Decline in sailing tonnage and increase in barges (Table 23, Appendix C 3) . 176 
Declining use of sailing vessels and increased use of barges in coastwise com- 
merce (Appendix C 3) 176 

Disasters to vessels on Atlantic and Gulf coast during period July 1, 1899, 

to June 30, 1909 (Table 26, Appendix C 3) 199 

Documented canal boats and barges of ports adjacent to proposed canal 

(Table 21, Appendix C 3) 194 

Documented tonnage at — 

New York (Table 10, Appendix C 3) 184 

Philadelphia (Table 11 , Appendix C 3) 182 

Documented vessels of ports adjacent to proposed canal (Table 9, Appen- 
dix C 3) 179 

Enrolled and licensed vessels over 20 tons, of Atlantic and Gulf coast 

(Table 8, Appendix C 3) 183 



16 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Page. 

Tables — Continued. 

Leading manufactures of Atlantic seaboard States (Table 15 , Appendix C 3) 189 
Length of sheltered waterways tributary to Boston-Beaufort Inlet division 

of intracoastal waterway (Appendix C 2) 162 

Lumber and timber products in adjacent States (Table 19, Appendix C 3). 192 

Manufactures of five industrial districts (Table 16, Appendix C 3) 190 

Production in territories adjacent to proposed canal (Appendix C 3) . . . 187-193 
Receipts and shipments of leading ports adjacent to proposed canal (Table 

1, Appendix 3) 188 

Relative cost of shipments by rail and barge (Table 29, Appendix C 3). . 197 
Relative growth of unrigged craft on Atlantic and Gulf coasts (Table 22, 

Appendix C 3) 195 

Shipment of coal by water (Table 11, Appendix C 3) 180 

Total manufactures of States adjacent to proposed canal (Table 13, Appen- 
dix C 3) . 187 

Total manufactures of leading cities influenced by proposed canal (Table 

14, Appendix C 3) 188 

Total receipts and shipments of domestic commerce as reported by United 

States engineers (Appendix C 3) 175 

Tonnage at port of Philadelphia, 1910 (Table 4, Appendix C 3) 181 

Value of production of minerals in adjacent States (Table 17, Appendix C 3) 191 
Vessels and crafts, Atlantic and Gulf coasts, 1906 (Table 7, Appendix C 3). 183 
Water- traffic tonnage (estimated), port of Philadelphia (Table 5, Appen- 
dix C 3) 182 

Taunton-Hingham route (A) 32,35 

Taunton-Plymouth route (A) 32,35 

Telephones (C) 70 

Tidal data: 

A 32-35 

B 36 

C 60 

D 68 

E 107 

Tidal currents in canal: 

B 44 

C 59,60 

D 68 

E 107 

Tidal locks: 

C 68 

D 94 

E 108 

Traffic through existing canals: 

C 76 

D 99 

E 114 

Traffic, present delays to: 

o J * ... .' 1 1 ". V.'. ". '. so 

D 95,96 

E 113,114 

Traffic, probable, through New Jersey section (Appendix C 3) 175 

Unit prices, Delaware River-Chesapeake Bay section. 94 

Unit prices, Narragansett Bay-Long Island Sound section 45 

Unit prices, New York Bay-Delaware River section 77 

Unit prices, Norfolk-Beaufort Inlet section 107 

Units required to transport a division of troops by rail and by water 27 

Value of minerals, lumber, farm products, and coal produced in the States tribu- 
tary to the waterway % 192 

Value of production of minerals in adjacent States (Table 17, Appendix 3).. 191 

Value of raw and finished material in the Atlantic seaboard States 83 

Vessels and crafts, Atlantic and Gulf coasts, 1906 (Table 7, Appendix C 3) 183 

Vessels, cost per ton for building different types 24 

Vessels, height of masts for different types 74 

Vessels lost on Altantic and Gulf coasts (Appendix C 3) 199 

Vessels, speed of, through canal (C) 74 



INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 17 

Page. 

Volume and value of traffic within the section affected by the proposed canal 

through New Jersey (Appendix C 3) 175 

Water and rail, comparison per ton-mile on coal (B) 47 

Water-borne commerce versus rail transportation 47 

Water power: 

B 43 

C 73 

Water-power damage: 

A 30 

B 39 

C 70 

Water supply available for lock canal: 

A 32-33 

B 43 

57-58 

D 94 

E 102-103 

Water terminal facilities (B) 44 

Water-traffic tonnage, estimated, port of Philadelphia (Table 5, Appendix C 3). ] 82 

Water transportation of troops, units required 27 

Waterways and railways, comparative cost of (C) 59 

Waterways tributary to the Boston-Beaufort division of the proposed intra- 

coastal waterway, length of (Appendix C 2) 162 



• 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 



Page. 

General map: Boston, Mass. — Rio Grande, Tex 18 

Index map: 35-foot level project, Taunton River and Hingham Harbor, Mass. 34 

Index map: 35-foot level project, Taunton River and Plymouth Harbor, Mass. 34 

Index map: Sea-level project, Bissels Cove to Little Narragansett Bay, R. I. 50 

New Jersey during the Pensauken period 5G 

Index map: Sea-level project, Philadelphia to New York Bay, Pa. and N. J.. 76 

Index map: Waterway between Delaware City and Pooles Island, Del. and Md . 98 

Index map: Sea-level project, Norfolk to Albemarle Sound, Va. and N. C 132 

Index may: Sea-level project, Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound, N. C 132 

General map: Sea-level project, Pamlico SouDd to Beaufort Inlet, N. C 132 

Diagram: Traffic of leading coastwise canals, 1880-1910 185 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 2* 




House Doc «»■ J 9J ; 62d Cone., 2d Sess. 



SURVEY OF THE BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C, SECTION 
OF THE PROPOSED CONTINUOUS INLAND WATERWAY FROM 
BOSTON, MASS., TO THE RIO GRANDE. 

War Department, 
United States Engineer Office, 

New York, N. Y., October 4, 1911. 

Sir: The board appointed by paragraph 1, Special Orders, No. 10, 
dated March 8, 1909, from the office of the Chief of Engineers, as 
amended by Special Orders, No. 34, dated July 13, 1909; No. 5, 
dated February 12, 1910; and No. 24, dated May 31, 1910, from the 
office of the Chief of Engineers, to make a survey for a continuous 
inland waterway from Boston, Mass., to Beaufort, N. C, and submit 
a report thereon as prescribed in the river and harbor act approved 
March 3, 1909, has the honor to submit the following report: 

Report on Boston-Beaufort Inlet Division, Proposed Intra- 

coastal Waterway. 

The river and harbor act approved March 3, 1909, contains the 
following clauses governing the preparation of a project for an 
intracoastal waterway: 

Sec. 13. * * * The Secretary of War is hereby authorized and directed to cause 
preliminary examinations and surveys to be made at the localities named in this sec- 
tion, as hereinafter set forth. 

******* 

Survey for the construction of a continuous waterway, inland where practicable, 
from Boston, Massachusetts, to Long Island Sound, including a waterway from the 
protected waters of Narragansett Bay through the ponds and lagoons lying along the 
southern coast of Rhode Island to Watch Hill and Fishers Island; thence to New York 
Bay; thence across the State of New Jersey to a suitable point on Delaware River 
or Bay; thence to Chesapeake Bay; thence from Norfolk, Virginia, to the sounds of 
North Carolina and Beaufort Inlet, North Carolina, for the purpose of ascertaining 
the cost of a channel with a maximum depth of twenty-five feet, or such lesser depths 
along any section or sections of the said waterway as may be found to be sufficient for 
commercial, naval, or military purposes. Such survey shall include an examination 
of all practicable routes, the preparation of plans and estimates of cost along the most 
available route, and a report upon the desirability of utilizing as a part of such water- 
way any existing public or private canal, or any part thereof, and the probable cost 
of acquiring the same. 

Survey for the construction of a continuous waterway, inland where practicable, 
from Beaufort, North Carolina, to the Cape Fear River, North Carolina; thence to 
Winyah Bay, South Carolina; thence to Saint Johns River, Florida; thence to Key 
West, Florida, for the purpose of ascertaining the cost of a channel with a maximum 
depth of twelve feet, or such lesser depths along any section or sections of the said 
waterway as may be found to be sufficient for commercial, naval, or military purposes. 
Such survey shall include an examination of all practicable routes, the preparation 
of plans and estimates of cost along the most available route, and a report upon the 
desirability of utilizing as a part of such waterway any existing public or private canal, 
or any part thereof, and the probable cost of acquiring the same. 

Survey for the construction of a continuous inland waterway across the State of 
Florida, between suitable points on the eastern and Gulf coasts of said State, for the 
purpose of ascertaining the cost of a channel with a maximum depth of twelve feet, 
or such lesser depths along any section or sections of said waterway as may be found 
sufficient for commercial, naval, and military purposes. Such survey shall include 



19 



20 IK TB AC O ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, Is. C. 



an examination of all practicable routes, the preparation of plans and estimates of 
cost along the most available route, and a report upon the desirability of utilizing as a 
part of such waterway any existing public or private canal, or any part thereof, and 
the probable cost of acquiring the same. 

Survey for the construction of a continuous waterway, inland where practicable, 
along the Gulf of Mexico from Saint Georges Sound, Florida, to the Mississippi River 
at New Orleans, Louisiana, by way of Saint Andrews Bay, Choctawhatchee Bay, 
Pensacola Bay, and Perdido Bay. Florida; Mobile Bay. Alabama; Mississippi Souncl, 
Alabama and Mississippi: Lake Borgne and Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana, for the 
purpose of ascertaining the cost of a channel with a maximum depth of nine feet, or 
such lesser depths along any section or sections of the said waterway as may be found 
to be sufficient for commercial, naval, or military purposes. Such survey shall include 
an examination of all practicable routes, the preparation of plans and estimates of 
cost along the most available route, and a report upon the desirability of utilizing as 
a part of such waterway any existing public or private canal, or any part thereof, 
and the probable cost of acquiring the same. 

Survey for the construction of a continuous inland waterway in the State of Cali- 
fornia, between suitable points on Humboldt Bay and Eel River, with a view to obtain- 
ing a channel of suitable width and a maximum depth of nine feet, or such lesser depths 
along any section or sections ox said waterway as may be found desirable. Such 
survey shall include an examination of all practicable routes. 

IXLAXD WATERWAY OF LOUISIANA AXD TEXAS. 

Survey for the construction of a continuous inland waterway from the Mississippi 
River to Bayou Teche: thence to Mermentau River; thence to Calcasieu River: thence 
to the Sabine River. Louisiana and Texas: thence to Galveston. Texas; thence to 
Brazos River. Texas; thence to Pass Cavallo; thence to Aransas Pass; thence to Point 
Isabel; and thence to the Rio Grande, for the purpose of ascertaining the cost of a 
channel with a maximum depth of nine feet, or such lesser depths along any section 
or sections of the said waterway as may be found to be sufficient for commercial, 
naval, or military purposes. Such survey shall include an examination of all practi- 
cable routes, the preparation of plans and estimates of cost along the most available 
route, and a report upon the desirability of utilizing as a part of such waterway any 
existing public or private canal, or any part thereof, and the probable cost of acquir- 
ing the same: Provided. That whenever, in the making of a survey of any of the pre- 
ceding waterways, field work shall indicate that the proposed improvement is clearly 
inadvisable, no detailed survey or plans shall be made. 

By departmental ruling the foHowing sentence of the last paragraph 
was held to apply to all the divisions of the intracoastal waterway 
above named: 

Such survey shall include an examination of all practicable routes, the preparation 
of plans and estimates of cost along the most available route, and a report upon the 
desirability of utilizing as a part of such waterway any existing public or private 
canal, or any part thereof, and the probable cost of acquiring the same: Provided, 
That whenever, in the making of a survey of any of the preceding waterways, field 
work shall indicate that the proposed improvement is clearly inadvisable no detailed 
survey or plans shall be made. 

In the river and harbor act approved June 25. 1910, the following 
additional legislation was enacted with reference to the Boston- 
Beaufort Inlet division: 

Improving inland waterway from Norfolk, Virginia, to Beaufort Inlet, North Caro- 
lina: The Secretary of War is hereby authorized to enter into negotiations for the pur- 
chase, as a part of said inland waterway, of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal, or 
the Dismal Swamp Canal, together with all property, rights of property, and fran- 
chises appertaining thereto; and he is further authorized, if in his judgment the 
price is reasonable" and satisfactory, to make a contract for the purchase of either 
of said canals and appurtenances, subject to future ratification and appropriation 
by Congress: Provided, That no contract for the purchase of either of said canals 
shall be" made unless such purchase, after full hearing of all parties in interest, is 
recommended in the survey report to be hereafter submitted in compliance with 
the directions of Congress in the river and harbor act approved March third, nineteen 



IN TEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 21 

hundred and nine: Provided further, That said report shall include estimates of the 
total cost of the completion of each of said canals, including also the purchase price 
of each, with the advantages of each for commerce. 

In compliance with these directions the Chief of Engineers, by 
authority of the Secretary of War, convened special boards of engineer 
officers to consider and report on each division of the intra coastal 
waterway named in the act. 

By Special Orders, No. 10, War Department, office of the Chief of 
Engineers, Washington, March 8,' 1909, paragraph 1, a board con- 
sisting of Col. William M. Black, Lieut. Col. Edw. Burr, Lieut. Col. 
James C. Sanford, Maj. Joseph E. Kuhn, and Capt. Lewis H. Rand 
was directed to perform the work for the division of the waterway 
from Boston, Mass., to Beaufort Inlet, N. C. Under date of July 13, 
1909, Lieut. Col. (then Maj.) Mason M. Patrick was substituted for 
Maj. Joseph E. Kuhn; under date of February 12, 1910, Maj. R. R. 
Raymond was substituted for Capt. Lewis H. Rand; and under date 
of May 31, 1910, Col. F. V. Abbot was substituted for Lieut. Col. 
Edw. Burr, these changes having been necessitated by changes of 
stations and duties of the officers concerned. 

The members of the board charged with the work of the Boston- 
Beaufort Inlet division made in person, from time to time, within the 
limits of the various sections, examinations of the proposed route or 
routes and considered all data obtained by the officers in local charge 
of the sections. After having maturely considered the entire subject 
the board submits the following as its conclusions as to the Boston- 
Beaufort Inlet division: 

CONCLUSIONS. 

Boston- Narragansett Bay section. — All practicable routes have been 
examined and two routes, which seemed to be the most practicable, 
were surveyed, starting at Narragansett Bay, one entirely inland 
from Taunton to Hingham and one inland from Taunton to Plymouth 
and thence from that point 30 miles via Massachusetts Bay to Boston. 
The advisability has also been considered of purchasing the partly 
completed Cape Cod Canal, which involves outside navigation from 
Fishers Island Sound all the way to Boston, except for a few miles 
in Buzzards Bay and in the 7 miles of canal proper On the two 
routes surveyed plans in detail sufficient to afford a basis for reliable 
estimates have been prepared for various depths, bottom widths, and 
heights of summit levels, with estimates of cost varying from $17,453,- 
000 for a canal 18 feet deep with bottom width of 125 feet and sum- 
mit level of 20 feet via Taunton and Plymouth, to $40,047,000 for a 
canal 25 feet deep with bottom width of 200 feet and summit level 
of 35 feet via Taunton and Hingham. At the present time there 
appears to be no commercial necessity sufficient to justify the con- 
struction of a canal over either of these inland routes. After other 
sections of the proposed intracoastal waterway have been con- 
structed and after the measure of relief to commerce to be afforded 
by the Cape Cod Ship Canal has been demonstrated the question 
of the need for a completely sheltered waterway between Narragansett 
Bay and Boston should receive further consideration. 

The economic value of the Cape Cod Canal, with its exposed 
approaches, has not yet been established. It is not considered advis- 
able for the United States to enter into any negotiations looking to 



22 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



the acquisition of this canal at the present time. After its comple- 
tion the question of its acquirement, based on its value as a 11 going 
concern," may be worthy of further consideration. 

Narragansett Bay-Long Island Sound section. — The only practicable 
route was examined and surveyed. No privately owned canal is 
available for purchase. This adopted route leaves Narragansett Bay 
at Bissells Cove and follows a series of tidal streams, ponds, and 
lagoons to Long Island Sound. A fair-weather entrance to the canal 
is also provided just north of Narragansett Pier. Plans in detail 
sufficient to afford a basis for reliable estimates have been prepared 
for various depths and widths, with the terminus at Bissells Cove, 
and also with a terminus just north of Narragansett Pier. They 
range from $11,399,205 for a canal 18 feet deep, with bottom width 
of 125 feet, terminating just north of Narragansett Pier, to $24,736,635 
for a canal 25 feet deep, with bottom width of 250 feet, terminating at 
Bissells Cove, with an outlet 18 feet deep just north of Narragansett 
Pier. 

A canal 18 feet deep, with 125 feet bottom width, terminating at 
Bissells Cove with an outlet 18 feet deep and 100 feet wide, just north 
of Narragansett Pier is recommended at an estimated cost of 
$12,322,000. 

The full benefits to be derived from this section can be obtained 
only after the completion of the sections to the south, and initiation 
of work should follow that on the New Jersey section. The State of 
Rhode Island has undertaken to provide a free right of way for the 
canal, as far as an appropriation of $500,000 will permit. It is 
recommended that the State be requested to take such further steps as 
may be necessary to change the location of highways and roads as 
outlined in this report, the cost of the bridges only to be borne by the 
United States. 

The commerce affected by this section of the Intracoastal Canal 
will be adequately served by a canal 18 feet deep and 125 feet clear 
bottom width. 

New York Bay-Delaware River section. — All practicable routes 
have been examined, and those which seemed most suitable were 
surveyed. The advisability of purchasing the Delaware & Raritan 
Canal was also considered, and the purchase is not recommended. 
On the surveyed route which proved the most desirable plans in 
detail sufficient to afford a basis for reliable estimates were prepared 
for a lock canal and for a sea-level canal. A sea-level canal with 
a depth of 25 feet and a bottom width of 125 feet is recommended. 

In the approach through Lower New York Bay the depth of 25 
feet is proposed for a width of 100 feet, with a depth of 18 feet for 
an additional width of 200 feet. A channel of the same dimensions 
is proposed in the Delaware River between the end of the canal at 
Bordentown and deep water at Philadelphia. Between Bordentown 
and Trenton it is proposed to provide a channel 150 feet wide and 
18 feet deep. The total estimated cost of construction is $45,000,000. 

The State of New jersey, by resolution of its legislature, has under- 
taken to expend not to exceed $500,000 toward providing a right of 
way for the canal. It is recommended that the State be requested 
to take such further steps as may be required to change the location 
of highways and roads to the extent which may be needed to carry 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 23 

out the plans for the canal and to authorize the necessary changes 
in steam and electric railroad locations. 

It is believed that the construction of this section of the canal 
should be deferred until after the construction of the two more 
southern sections and until the United States plant now at work in 
the Panama Canal shall be made available. 

Delaware River- Chesapeake Bay section. — All practicable routes in 
this section were examined and the Back Creek route, along the line 
of the present Chesapeake & Delaware Canal, was selected and sur- 
veyed as the most available. A plan has been prepared for a canal 
25 feet deep and with a bottom width of 125 feet, and such a canal 
along this route and with these dimensions is recommended. The 
estimated cost of construction is $9,910,210. 

The board is of opinion that the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal 
property should be acquired by the United States by purchase. The 
cost has heretofore been estimated at $2,514,290. (See S. Doc. No. 215, 
59th Cong., 2d sess.) No definite proposition has been received by 
this board for the sale of the canal. The purchase price is in addition 
to the construction cost stated above. 

The importance of this section is deemed sufficient to warrant the 
immediate purchase of the existing canal and the inception of work 
for its enlargement as soon as funds can be made available. 

Norfolk- Beaufort Inlet section. — All practicable routes have been 
examined and a route via the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, Curri- 
tuck Sound, Alligator River, Rose Bay, and Adams Creek has been 
selected and surveyed as the most available. A plan has been pre- 
pared for a canal having a depth of 12 feet and a minimum bottom 
width of 90 feet and such a canal along this route is recommended. 
The estimated cost of construction is $4,901,580. This canal can be 
deepened subsequently if the commerce developed warrants such 
enlargement. 

The property of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal Co. is recom- 
mended to be purchased by the United States, the estimated cost of 
acquiring the same being $500,000, which is in addition to the con- 
struction cost stated above. 

It is believed that the commercial necessities in this section as well 
as the comparatively low cost of the canal warrant the immediate 
purchase of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, and the inception of 
work on the enlargement and extension recommended, without delay. 

GENERAL REMARKS ON FREIGHT TRANSPORTATION. 

The general question of the advantages to be gained by opening 
through water routes for the carriage of freight have been discussed 
in numerous reports and papers during the past few years. It is 
unnecessary for this board to go deeply into this subject in this 
report; but it may be well to touch on certain aspects. 

It is claimed that large outlays for the improvement and con- 
struction of internal waterways are uneconomical in that the service 
of freight carriage can be performed better and with greater economy 
along the coast by ocean-going lines (including steam and sail cargo 
vessels and ocean-going barges under tow) and internally by the 
railways. In support of this are cited the great development of the 
coastwise and Great Lakes traffic and of the railway systems and the 



24 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



decline in many instances of water-borne commerce of the rivers 
after parallel lines of railways have been established. It would 
appear to the board that such reasoning is only partly justified in 
fact. 



United States are appalling and are apparently unavoidable. To 
minimize these losses the vessels used must be strongly built and of 
an expensive type. The relative cost of the type of carrier per ton is 
approximately as follows: 1 



To offset the losses marine insurance is taken out, which for an 
outside route runs from 8 to 12 per cent annually, 2 as against an 
average of 4 per cent for an inside route. 2 

Both of these factors make toward an increase of cost of carriage. 

Another increment of cost for an outside route lies in the greater 
time consumed, due to a longer course generally necessarily followed, 
and to delays incident to fog and storm. 

From figures presented the board believes that navigation by 
interior lines presents advantages to commerce over outside routes 
which vary in value for different sections, but which are sufficient in 
general to justify the opening of certain interior lines. 

The decline of internal waterway traffic in many localities which 
has followed the construction of railway lines the board believes to 
be due to causes other than the inherent advantages of railway freight 
traffic, and which are to a certain extent artificial. 

Water-borne commerce is necessarily confined to the limits of navi- 
gation, and rehandling is necessary when points beyond such limits 
are to be reached, while cars can be transferred from line to line and 
point to point without breaking bulk. This advantage will always 
remain with the railway carriage. In sparsely settled areas sufficient 
commerce may not exist within easy haul of the waterways and there 
the railway lines may be the more advantageous. The history of our 
waterways shows that originally they were frequently the only pos- 
sible channels of commerce and bore all the traffic of the regions 
traversed. Later came the railway, and the water commerce declined. 
Still later, with an increase of population, came commerce sufficient 
in amount to supply both rail and water channels of communication, 
and the water commerce increased. 

The decline of the volume of water-borne commerce in competition 
with the railways is partly due to other causes which should be men- 
tioned. In the past, railway development in the United States has 
been in advance of the actual necessities of commerce. Under these 
circumstances, in their fight for existence, the railways have been 
permitted to make discriminating rates by which points at which 
water competition was possible are served more cheaply by rail than 
are points not so favored. Since under the competition of the several 
railways with each other rates had to be kept at a minimum con- 

1 Report of Special Board of Engineers on Survey of Mississippi River, 1909, p. 24 (H. Doc. No. 50, 61st 
Cong., 1st sess). 
* Philadelphia Report, p. 200. 



As shown in the re 
the annual losses of 1 




ia committee on traffic, 
e coastwise trade of the 



Ocean vessels 

Lake vessels 

Mississippi River tug with barges for 10,000 tons of freight 



$75. 00 
41. 50 
12. 00 



INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 25 

sistent with covering the coste of operation and maintenance and 
paying a return on moneys invested, it is evident that lower rates 
granted to points with water competition have to be compensated for 
by the higher rates to the interior points, or, in other words, the 
interior population has had to pay in part for the freight service to the 
population on the waterways. This is a manifest injustice which will 
undoubtedly be corrected when the modern tendency to cause charges 
for public utilities to be made in accordance with the cost of the serv- 
ice rendered has received further development. Instances are of 
record where a waterway carries little or no commerce, but where its 
presence causes a lower railway freight rate within the area of its zone 
of influence. The condition is wholly artificial and must disappear in 
measure as the inflexible necessities of world competition shall force 
production and trade into the area and lines of least cost. 

Similarly, it has been a policy of the railway companies to obtain 
possession as far as possible of all available wharf space in terminal 
cities, partly with a view to preventing competition. The recent move- 
ment toward providing adequate public wharf spafce in the cities will 
counteract this evil. Further, in many cases, railways have been so 
operated as to throw obstacles in the way of dividing a long-distance 
carriage between rail and water and thus to make an all-rail carriage 
most advantageous. This has been done by increasing the difficulties 
and costs of transfer between the rail and water carriers, by refusing 
to make or honor through bills of lading over mixed rail and water 
routes, or by making charges for short hauls by rail for distribution 
from water terminals prohibitively high. Since the railways are quasi- 
public institutions, owing their possibility of existence to important 
public rights granted by law, it is certain that a policy of this kind 
which is manifestly contrary to the public interests must eventually be 
changed. Until action has been taken by the Nation and States which 
will insure cooperation between transportation companies operating 
by rail and by water and thus provide for the interchange of com- 
merce at the minimum of expense to the public, the full benefits to be 
obtained from the improvement of waterways can not be had, and 
the benefits received must be measured mainly by the lowering of rail 
freight rates to favored communities located on water routes. 

Railways are a necessity and have natural advantages sufficient to 
justify their continued existence and extension. It is a mistake fco 
assume that the opening of additional channels for commerce by im- 
proving the waterways will necessarily be disadvantageous to the rail- 
ways. Each channel of commerce has its own legitimate field of opera- 
tions — and the increase of the facilities for intercommunication, where 
wisely made, is invariably followed by increased prosperity for all. 
From a recent report 1 it is found that in Germany, where development 
of waterways has been the policy of recent years, in 1875 the traffic 
over 26,500 kilometers of railways amounted to 10,900,000,000 kilo- 
meter tons; and that over 10,000 kilometers of waterways amounted 
to 2,900,000,000 kilometer tons; in 1905 the traffic over 54,400 kilo- 
meters of railways was 44,600,000,000 kilometer tons; and that over 
the 10,000 kilometers of waterways was 15,000,000,000 kilometer 
tons. Here was an increase of railway mileage of 105 per cent. The 



1 Civil Engineering at the Universal Exposition of Brussels 1910— Public Works in Germany— Publica- 
tion of Permanent International Association of Navigation Congresses. 



26 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

kilometer and mile tonnage increase by rail was four times ; that by 

water five times. 

Again, it is of record that the city of Liverpool opposed the con- 
struction of the Manchester Ship Canal, which connects Manchester 
with the sea through the port of Liverpool, in the fear that there 
would be a resulting diminution of the commerce of Liverpool in 
favor of that of Manchester. It is now also of record that this fear 
has been groundless and that the opening of this canal has been 
followed by an increased growth of Liverpool commerce. 1 

GENERAL REMARKS ON THE MILITARY VALUE OF THE PROPOSED 

WATERWAY. 

It is a well-established principle that, for the defense of a frontier 
threatened by an attack from without, at some unknown point, the 
forces for the defense shall be concentrated within the frontier line 
at points from which they can be moved rapidly and safely to the 
actual point of attack when developed. The proposed intracoastal 
waterway between New York and Norfolk forms a most desirable 
line for such movement of troops, lying, as it does, for its entire 
distance under the shelter of fortifications built or planned for the 
defense of the coast. The section between Narragansett Bay and 
Long Island Sound is less well suited for this purpose, inasmuch as 
it skirts the coast closely between the defenses at the eastern entrance 
of Long Island Sound and those of Narragansett Bay, where it can 
be approached closely by a hostile fleet. While the section from 
Norfolk to Beaufort Inlet also, for a portion of its way through 
Currituck Sound, lies within distinct view of the ocean, the shoal 
waters of the ocean to the north of Cape Hatteras would make it 
extremely dangerous for a hostile fleet to approach the coast within 
effective range of gun fire, and' therefore this section would also be 
of great value for military operations. The usefulness of such por- 
tions of this inland waterway as were in existence at the outbreak of 
the Civil W ar was thoroughly proved in the operations at that time. 

The dimensions recommended for the waterway between New 
York and Norfolk are sufficient to permit navigation by any of the 
steamers of the United States coastwise passenger trade and by the 
largest class of inland waterway boats. From Norfolk to Beauf6rt 
Inlet the depth recommended is sufficient for navigation by most of 
the inland waterway passenger steamers. 

For the movement of troops, sheltered water transportation affords 
many advantages over transportation by rail. Among these advan- 
tages may be named (a) the possibility of keeping the larger adminis- 
trative units united in a single carrier; (b) the diminished chances of 
delay to an entire expeditionary force by the wreck of one of the 
transporting units; (c) the smaller number of transporting units 
required ; (d) the greater freedom from ordinary delays m transit due 
to ordinary commercial traffic. 

The number of transportation units required for a division of troops 
by rail and by water with field equipment, rations and forage for three 



1 P. 228, Report of Barge Canal Terminal Commission, New York, 1911. 



INTR AC OASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 27 



days, obtained through the courtesy of Lieut. Col. R. McA. Schofield, 
Quartermaster's Department, is as follows: 

If rail transportation is used the following would be required: 

For enlisted men, 356 passenger cars. 

For officers, 26 passenger cars. 

For civilian teamsters, etc., 13 passenger cars. 

Baggage, etc., 78 baggage or freight cars. 

Horses and mules, 344 stock, if large-size cars; if small, 420. 

Wagons, guns, etc., 141 flat and freight; wagons to be loaded with ammunition, 
rations, etc. 
Total, 958. 

To move a division of troops by water there would be required: 

Twelve ships, size of Kentuckian (A. H. Co.), 20-foot draft, or 11 ships, size of Texan 
(A. H. Co.), 20-foot draft, or 22 ships, size of Momus (S. P. Co.), 16-foot draft. 

The above is based on a complete division, viz, 9 regiments of 
Infantry, 1 regiment of Cavalry, 2 regiments of Artillery, 1 battalion of 
Engineers, 2 companies of Signal Corps, 4 Hospital Corps companies, 
wagon and pack trains, and consisting of the following: 780 officers, 
12 veterinarians, 565 civilians, 18,533 enlisted men, 8,265 horses and 
mules, necessary wagons, ambulances, guns, caissons, carts, etc. 

One hundred and forty-two thousand one hundred and seventy-two 
gross tonnage of space is required to accommodate the above. 

One tug and three excursion barges drawing 9 feet loaded can carry 
one complete regiment and its impedimenta. 

For naval purposes it is necessary here only to invite attention to 
the very great advantage to be obtained by providing an additional 
and protected entrance for each of the ports from New York to Nor- 
folk, inclusive — an advantage which would make impossible an effec- 
tive blockade of any one of these ports. 

From the above it is evident that the construction of the canal 
would add greatly to the defensive strength of the United States. 

GENERAL REMARKS. 

With these considerations in mind, the board has arrived at the 
conclusions given above, based on the detailed information contained 
in the reports for each section. 

In laying out the proposed canal routes the board has avoided 
grade crossings with trunk lines of railway. Where railway and 
highway lines have to be crossed, such an arrangement is proposed as 
will cause a practicable minimum of interference between the land 
and water traffic, bringing to a single bridge highways which are close 
together and making all bridges of the bascule type, with a clear width 
of opening of 150 feet and with a maximum practicable clear height 
beneath when closed. 

To reduce the difficulties of navigation, the canal lines are laid down 
in tangents connected by curves having a radius of 2,000 feet as a 
minimum, when practicable, with a widening of cross section at the 
curves proportional to the increased width of waterway occupied by 
vessels while turning. 

In the detailed reports for each section of the waterway will be 
found the reasons which lead the board to recommend for each sec- 
tion the adopted route and the adopted cross section as well as the 



28 INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



economic considerations which justify to the board its recommenda- 
tion as to the advisability of an immediate or a future construction 
of the canal. 

Beginning in the lumber region of North Carolina the first section 
is found to be the cheapest, the draft required to carry commerce 
existing and probable in the immediate future is the least, and it 
can be made available for commerce quicker than any other, prac- 
tically following in fact a route in use at the present time. Free- 
dom from tolls alone will be an aid to commerce. The section be- 
tween Chesapeake Bay and Delaware Bay is likewise now in use, 
and its betterment is comparatively inexpensive. There can there- 
fore be no question as to the position of the board on these two south- 
ern sections. The section between Philadelphia and New York is 
entirely new, extremely costly, and involves the use of a large and 
efficient plant similar to that in use on the Panama Canal, soon to 
be available for other United States work. As shown elsewhere in 
this report, the board has been convinced that in spite of cost and 
difficulty the New Jersey section should be undertaken. For the 
Rhode Island section there is available a succession of lagoons and 
low-lying marshes which make the canal to all intents and purposes 
a question of dredging, which can be done rapidly or slowly without 
great difference in ultimate cost, so that economy of construction in 
that link is not a question of an enormously expensive plant. 

Boston- Narragansett Bay section. — The law requires a "survey for 
the construction of a continuous waterway, inland where practicable, 
from Boston, Mass., to Long Island Sound * * */ J of which the 
portion lying immediately south of Boston Harbor was assigned by 
the Chief of Engineers, In accordance with the recommendation of 
the board, to the officer in charge of the district of Boston. The 
w T ords "inland where practicable" make it necessary to study not 
only a strictly inland connection between Narragansett Bay and 
Boston Harbor, but also to cover the case of a possible inland canal 
terminating in Plymouth Harbor, only 30 miles south of Boston 
Harbor entrance, as well as the Cape Cod Canal between Barnstable 
Bay and Buzzards Bay, now under construction by a private cor- 
poration on plans approved by the State of Massachusetts. 

The importance of providing a safe and uninterrupted water route 
for the traffic annually passing around Cape Cod from the South 
Atlantic coast of the United States and from Long Island Sound early 
led to surveys and projects for the creation of an artificial waterway 
across the peninsula of Cape Cod, and also for a more completely 
inland route from Boston Harbor to Narragansett Bay. The follow- 
ing is a brief list of important and valuable reports on the subject: 

BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

(a) Report on a route from Buzzards Bay to Barnstable Bay by Mr. Thomas Machin, 
in 1776. Collections of Massachusetts Historical Society, Volume VIII, printed in 
1826. Massachusetts State Library. 

(b) Plan of survey by Mr. John Hills, under resolve of the General Court of Massa- 
chusetts in 1791, filed in archives of State of Massachusetts. See also monthly bulletin 
of the Boston Public Library for January, 1910. 

(c) Manuscript map bearing title "A survey for a water communication from Wey- 
mouth landing places in Boston Harbor to the tidewater at Taunton Great River lead- 
ing to Narragansett Bay in Long Island Sound, by order of the honorable legislature 
agreeable to their resolve dated March 6, 1806. Boston, February 1, 1808, by Benj. F. 



INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 29 



Baldwin." Filed as catalogue No. 1720, Massachusetts archives, collection of maps 
and plans. 

(d) Manuscript report of a committee composed of William Taylor and Eliphalet 
Loud, dated Boston, Mass., February 1, 1808, filed in Massachusetts State Archives aa 
Chapter 120-B, Resolves of 1807, February 28, 1808. 

(e) Pamphlet on a canal from Worcester to Providence, published by the committee 
of the county of Worcester, December, 1822. 

(/) Report of the joint special committee of the Legislature of Massachusetts, printed 
by joint order of March 28 and 29, 1860, public document No. 34. This contains an 
engraved map of the survey for a Cape Cod canal made in the season of 1824 by Maj. 
P. H. Perrault, United States Topographical Engineers, and his report dated Feb- 
ruary 25, 1825; also a report of Gen. Barnard, member of the board of internal improve- 
ments, dated November 13, 1829, assisted by Maj. William T. Poussin, Topographical 
Engineers, assistant to the board; also a report of Col. J. J. Abert. 

(g) Report of joint committee of 1860 of the Legislature of Massachusetts, printed 
in i864 as public document No. 41. This gives a thorough history to its date and the 
results of very complete surveys and investigations made in 1860 and 1861, but does 
not contain the maps and reports printed in 1860 in public document No. 34, above. 
It also discusses dangers of excessive currents through an open sea-level cut, and sug- 
gests the idea of overcoming the excessive slope by debouching at Plymouth, but 
does not recommend the method, in view of the cost as compared with the cost of 
locks to serve the same purpose. (See p. 55 of the document.) It mentions also 
surveys for canals from Boston Harbor to Narragansett Bay via the following routes: 
One beginning at Weymouth Back River, which divides Weymouth from Hingham, 
and passing through Weymouth, a corner of Hingham, Abington, East Bridge water 
to Fitaquit Bridge in Middleboro, thence through Middleboro and Taunton to 
Assonet Bay, on Taunton Great River, about 8 miles below Taunton village. The 
summit level on this route was in Abington. The other, being the westerly route, 
began at Weymouth Fore River and passed through the towns of Braintree, Randolph, 
North Bridgewater, West Bridgewater, Bridgewater, and Raynham to Taunton Great 
River in Taunton, the summit level being at Howard's meadow, in Randolph. 

(h) Report of Gen. J. G. Foster, lieutenant colonel, Corps of Engineers, United 
States Army, dated May 10, 1870, in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 
1870, pages 477-495. This gives a brief history of former operations, taken from Docu- 
ment No. 41, above, and appends a copy of the report of the board of internal improve- 
ments, made in February, 1825, before Maj. Perrault's report of surveys. This does 
not appear in any of the previous papers. Gen. Foster discusses the Cape Cod Canal 
at length, with estimates of cost, etc. 

(i) Pamphlet by Clemens Herschel, chief engineer Cape Cod Canal Co., in 1878. 
Press of Rockwell & Churchill, 1878. 

(j) Hearing before the joint committee on harbors and public lands upon the peti- 
tion of H. M. Whitney and others for an act of incorporation for the Cape Cod Canal Co., 
March 6, 1880. 

(k) Report of Lieut. Col. G. K. Warren, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, 
dated February 3, 1882, in Annual Report of the Chief of Engineers for 1882, pages 
579-595, which, however, is closely limited to the question of approaches to the Cape 
Cod Canal, as the latter was proposed at that date by the Cape Cod Canal Co., of 
which Mr. H. M. Whitney was president. 

(I) Short report of Col. S. M. Mansfield, contained in Annual Report of the Chief 
of Engineers for 1897, pages 64 and 864, on the approaches to the Cape Cod Canal. 
He stated that there was no Cape Cod Canal, and as the company that was to build 
one had forfeited its charter by failing to comply with its provisions, no approaches 
were needed. 

(m) Report on ship canal from Taunton River to Boston Harbor by the board of 
harbor and land commissioners, under resolves of 1901, chapter 104, and of 1902, 
chapter 82. The estimated cost was over $57,600,000, and 14 locks were contem 
plated. The summit level was at elevation 130 above mean low water in Boston 
Harbor. The unit prices for earth excavation varied from 20 cents to 35 cents, averag- 
ing 29+ cents per cubic yard, according to the nature of the soil, those for rock depend- 
ing on the kind of rock and its location, from $1 to $10, averaging $1.37 per cubic 
yard. To these figures 15 per cent was to be added for contingencies. A depth 
of 25 feet was proposed, with a bottom width of 130 feet and side slopes of 1 on 2 in 
earth and vertical sides in rock cuts. 

(ri) A paper by Mr. William Barclay Parsons, chief engineer of Cape Cod Canal 
(under the most recent charter), read before the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Conference, 
Philadelphia, Pa., November 19, 1907, printed in the Annals of the American Academy 



30 IN TK AC ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

0k 



of Political and Social Science, January, 1908, page 81. Thismmus arizes some of the 
above historical data; states that while the law requires a width of only 100 feet, "it 
is probable that the minimum width will be greatly exceeded; in fact, it is most likely 
that the passing places, instead of being made three in number, will be connected so 
that the canal will have everywhere a bottom width of 150 to 200 feet." The depth 
is stated to be 25 feet at mean-low water, giving a depth through the 8 miles of canal 
of 30 feet at mean-high water in Buzzards Bay. There is to be no lock, the engineers 
of the canal company believing that tidal currents will not exceed practicable veloci- 
ties. Mr. Parsons puts the estimated tonnage in 1897 of materials that could have 
used a canal, had there been one available, at about 18,000,000. 

(o) Report of board of harbor and land commissioners, State of Massachusetts, 
for year 1909, public document No. 11. Commencement of work on Cape Cod Canal 
was reported to the joint board by the canal company June 21, 1909; on November 
30, 1909, 46,000 tons of stone had been placed in the breakwater and 230,000 cubic 
yards of excavation had been done in Barnstable and Buzzards Bays; the question 
of railroad crossings had been decided on June 3, 1907; the canal would probably be 
completed before June 3, 1912; failure to complete would render the act chartering 
the company null and void; recommendation was therefore made that extension of 
the five-year period for completion be made discretionary with the joint board. 
(Board of railroad commissioners and board of harbor and land commissioners.) 

(p) Report of Board of Harbor and Land Commissioners, State of Massachusetts, 
for year 1910, public document No. 11. The joint board on September 9 and 23, 1910, 

Eassed orders certifying and approving the issue by the canal company of stock and 
onds aggregating 8,190 shares of stock and $820,000 in bonds, making authorization 
to December 1, 1910, of a total of 14,180 shares of stock of the par value of $100 each 
and $1,420,000 in bonds. On December 1, 1910, approximately 45 per cent of the 
breakwater construction had been completed and work suspended for the winter, 
and approximately 25 per cent of the total work on the canal had been completed. 

(q) Report of the Commission on Inland Waterways on a Free Ship Canal connecting 
Boston and Narragansett Bay, according to chapter 26, Resolves of 1911, dated May 
1, 1911. The commission was to consider in what manner the Commonwealth may 
best cooperate with the Federal Government in the construction of a free ship canal 
across the State. The commission was of opinion that cooperation with the Federal 
Government could only take effect by sharing in some manner the cost of the construc- 
tion, and in the supplying by the State of such facilities in the way of terminals, both 
at the ends of the canal and at intermediate points, as would make the canal useful 
and convenient for the shipment and receipt of freight. The right of way in Massa- 
chusetts comprises about 9,000 acres of land, which with land damages and damages 
to water privileges would cost $900,000, to which $1,000,000 should be added for ter- 
minals, making a total outlay on the part of the Commonwealth of $1,900,000. This 
report contains a digest of letters and hearing, and the conclusions of the commission 
are that the facts as they now appear do not warrant the commission in advocating 
the present construction of the proposed canal. (See Appendix A.) 

As actual excavation by a private company was in progress on the 
Cape Cod Canal, and all topography and levels were thus available 
without Government surveys, field work was limited to the inland 
routes between Taunton and Boston Harbor. A route via Brockton 
had been surveyed by the State of Massachusetts in 1901. (See 
Bibliography under heading (m). That survey showed that such 
high ground existed near Brockton as to necessitate an impracticable 
number of locks, and that the summit level would have to be supplied 
by pumping salt water for a long distance. For these reasons no 
field work was done on that route by this board. For comparison 
purposes the route is shown, however, on the accompanying map. 

Counting the Brockton route and the Buzzards Bay-Barnstable 
Bay-Cape Cod route, both of which, although unsurveyed by the 
board, have been given careful study, seven different possible canal 
lines have received consideration, four of them having been actually 
surveyed and a survey of a part of a fifth having been made. Of the 
five surveyed, approximate computations of quantities showed that 
two were plainly superior to all the others; one terminating inHing- 
ham Bay in Boston Harbor proper; the other in Plymouth Harbor, 



IN TR AC ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 31 

on Massachusetts Bay, about 30 miles south of Boston Harbor main 
entrance. For both sufficient details were obtained to afford a 
reliable basis for definite quantitative estimates and for satisfactory 
solution of the problem of crossings for existing streams, highways, 
and electric and steam railroads. The law. approved March 3, 1909, 
required the examination of "all practicable routes/ ' and the seven 
routes shown on the map fully cover this requirement. Large num- 
bers of minor variants were partly surveyed, field work on such 
variants being suspended as required by the above law as soon as 
the data obtained in the field showed that such a " proposed improve- 
ment 'is clearly inadvisable." 

That requirement of law implies that surveys should be prosecuted 
until the in advisability of the improvement is "clearly" shown. To 
determine this question properly, it was found necessary to continue 
field work on two routes, those via Hingham and via Plymouth, till 
costs were determined with sufficient accuracy to permit a true 
comparison to be made between the inherent commercial value of 
each route and its cost and between the two routes, considering both 
cost and commercial utility. The law also requires "a report upon 
the desirability of utilizing * * * any existing public or private 
canal * * * and the probable cost of acquiring the same." 

All the factors involved are large. Water-borne commerce between 
Boston and the South to the amount of about 25,000,000 tons now 
passes outside of Cape Cod through waters so exposed as to prohibit 
the use of any but sea-going vessels. Rocky ledges and shoals and 
frequent fogs add to the other dangers to which this large tonnage 
is exposed. Wrecks and losses of life and property are frequent. 
Insurance is high, and freight rates are correspondingly affected. 

No straight inland route is practicable. Starting from Point 
Judith, the North River Valley route, 96 miles long, is so crooked as 
to be only 20 miles shorter than the proposed Cape Cod Canal route, 
116 miles long. The slow speed necessarily incident to a contracted 
waterway would in good weather make the time of passage through 
any canal via North River Valley exceed that via the Cape Cod Canal 
in spite of the saving of 20 miles in absolute distance. The Plymouth 
route, 113 miles long, computed from Point Judith, is only 3 miles 
shorter than that via the Cape Cod Canal, and passes at its northern 
end through 30 miles of the exposed deep waters of Massachusetts 
Bay, with a rocky coast line to the leeward in case of easterly winds. 
Commerce is likely to be interrupted by such winds as well as by 
frequent fogs. 

The following physical characteristics are common to the North 
River Valley and the Plymouth routes. There would be few curves, 
none in either route of less than 2,200 feet radius. For purposes of 
estimate the minimum bottom width was taken at 125 feet, widened 
at all curves, and the clear depth at 18 feet; the submerged side 
slopes are one rise to two base, protected against wash. The locks 
were assumed 80 feet wide in the clear and 500 feet long in the clear, 
capable of taking at one lockage three barges and one large tug. The 
capacity of such a canal would be quite limited, and estimates for 
the same depth, but width of 200 feet on the bottom, have been pre- 
pared. A considerable proportion of the sea-going coal barges now 
running to Boston from the South draw too much water for the depth 



32 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

of 18 feet. Estimates have therefore been prepared for a 2.5-foot 
depth on both routes, with both 125 and 200 feet bottom widths. 

On the Taunton-Hingham line the first lock is about half a mile 
south of Weir village, and has a lift of 20 feet at low tide. The second 
is in the town of Halifax, about half a mile northeast of the conflu- 
ence of the Taunton and Wenatuxet Rivers. Its lift is 15 feet, and 
attains the summit level. The third and fourth locks descend to 
tide level, and are in the town of Hingham, near the Nantasket Junc- 
tion station of the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad. 
They are in flight, with lifts of 17.5 feet each at mean low water. The 
summit level extends from the second to the third lock, a length of 
about 26 miles, of which about 6 miles is through a lake formed by 
damming the North River just west of Union Bridge. About half 
of the supply of the summit level would have to be provided by pump- 
ing salt water from the North River below the dam, so that under 
ordinary conditions the water in the canal would be brackish. 

On the Plymouth route with a 20-foot summit level the first lock 
is identical with the first lock on the Taunton-Hinghani line; the sec- 
ond lock is just east of Holmes Hill in the town of Kingston, with a 
lift of 20 feet at mean low water. The summit level is about 26 miles 
long, and would be supplied partly b}' natural drainage and partly by 
pumping salt water from the Jones River. There would be no lake 
navigation in this summit level. On the Plymouth route a sea-level 
cut is possible ; and estimates for both 125 and 200 feet bottom widths 
have been prepared. The first tide lock is about half a mile north of 
Dighton and has a lift of about 4 feet at mean low water. The second 
tide lock occupies the site east of Holmes Hill in the town of Kings- 
ton, described above, and has a lift of about 10 feet at mean low water. 
The natural fresh- water drainage and the difference in times of tide 
at the two ends is sufficient to fill the summit level without recourse 
to pumping until the traffic becomes very heavy. The sea-level route 
has thus in reality a summit level of 10 feet above mean low water, 
and the canal would be filled with fresh water for most of the year. 

To secure all available data, a circular letter was widely distributed 
asking State, county, and municipal authorities, and commercial 
bodies and vessel owners, for their views as to the dimensions of canal 
needed to provide suitable facilities for commerce. This letter stated, 
for both the routes surveyed, the estimated costs of canals with bot- 
tom widths of 125 and 200 feet and depths of 18 and 25 feet. Al- 
most without exception the 25-foot depth, the 200-foot bottom width, 
and the terminus at Hmgham Bay were advocated by those replying 
to the circular, although this was the most costly route and type of 
canal, roughly estimated, without borings, to cost $40,047,000 for 
construction, and $836,000 annually for operation and maintenance. 
This high feost of operation is due to the fact that a large part of the 
supply of the summit level would have to be pumped from the ocean. 
In Boston there was little evidence of a serious desire for any canal, 
while great interest was evinced by persons living or doing business 
near the Taunton end. On receipt of the letter the governor of 
Massachusetts sent a message to the General Court of Massachusetts 
recommending the creation of a State commission to study the ques- 
tion, and such a commission was created by a resolve of February 28, 
1911, "to consider in what manner the Commonwealth may best co- 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 33 

operate with the Federal Government and certain other States in the 
development of inland waterways." On May l, 1911, this commission 
submitted to the general court a report which is appended marked 
"A-l"(seep. 135). It sent out numerous circulars, held public hearings, 
and had many meetings. The final conclusion (see Bibliography, q) 
is that "the conditions of transportation may so change in the future 
as to make such a canal desirable and necessary, but the facts as they 
now appear do not warrant this commission in advocating the present 
construction of the proposed canal." 

This authoritative expression of the view of the State of Massachu- 
setts confirms the conclusions of the board itself that at the present 
time it is clearly inadvisable to construct a canal between Taunton and 
Boston on either of the inland routes. 

This section of the intracoastal waterway is at the extreme north- 
ern end, and until the section next to it on the south is built the 
dangers of open-sea navigation around Point Judith have to be met 
by all craft passing through the canal. This would largely exclude 
the class of smooth-water coal barges, the use of which in place of the 
more costly ocean-going coal barges would cause most of the econo- 
mies of transportation by canal. It is not to be expected that Con- 
gress will undertake the construction of all sections of the waterway 
at the same time, with provision for an economic rate of progress. 
The sections which form the connection between the manufacturing 
centers of the north and the coal, lumber, and truck producing 
regions of the south by a waterway which avoids the dangers of the 
Atlantic coast are those for which there is the most urgent necessity, 
and the construction of these sections in such order as will permit a 
most economical use of plant should be entered upon first. The full 
benefits to be derived from the New England sections of the waterway 
can be attained only after the more southern sections are open for 
navigation. 

There are many good reasons for postponing work on the Massa- 
chusetts section, of which not the least is the desirability of learning 
to what extent commerce actually takes advantage of the facilities 
provided by the more southern and central sections, and whether the 
greater depth and width demanded for this Massachusetts canal by 
all parties interested is really justified by experience on these links. 
A stronger argument for delay is the probable early completion of the 
Cape Cod Canal by private parties. The best route inland from 
Point Judith via Taunton is practically the same length in miles as 
that via the Cape Cod Canal, and if both were available it is hard to 
foresee which route would be followed by the bulk of water-borne 
commerce. With the opening of the Cape Cod Canal, much will be 
learned. At present persons in positions to be well informed differ 
widely in their views. The board has been assured by such persons 
that few vessels of any type would use the Cape Cod Canal even if 
operated toll free; by others, that not even steamers would pass out- 
side the cape, but that all vessels would use the Cape Cod Canal as 
soon as opened. That canal will have a depth of 25 feet and a bottom 
width of 100 feet. Experience will show whether the 200 feet so 
uniformly demanded for the Taunton canals by the navigation inter- 
ests is necessary. 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 3 



34 INTRAC ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Taking all the above matters into consideration, the board believes 
that the improvement between Taunton and Boston is "clearly 
inadvisable" at the present time. The surveys have been suspened, 
but the maps so far as completed are submitted with this report. It 
will be noted that no borings have been made, but the character of 
excavation is quite well known from wells, railroad cuts, etc., near the 
line of the canal. Toward the southern end excavation would, with 
some exceptions, be easy. At the northern end cutting would be 
mostly in solid rock. While the estimates are less reliable than if 
based on thorough and numerous borings, they are believed to be 
sufficiently close to prove that either canal would be very costly. 

There remain only the questions of utilizing the Cape Cod Canal (now 
partially constructed) and of the probable cost of acquiring the same. 

Through the courtesy of Mr. William Barclay Parsons, chief engi- 
neer of the Cape Cod Canal Co., the board has been furnished with the 
latest information as to the present plans for that canal. They are 
essentially the same as the plans originally approved by the harbor 
and land commissioners of the State of Massachusetts under date of 
May 8, 1907, and provide for a canal with a length of about 7f miles 
through marsh and high land with approaches, dredged for a short 
distance in Cape Cod Bay under the lee of a stone jetty, and for about 
3 miles in the upper and sheltered end of Buzzards Bay. In the Buz- 
zards Bay approach there are two rather sharp changes of direction. 
The Cape Cod Bay approach is straight. In the land cut no bend has 
a less radius than about 7,500 feet. About one-quarter of the land 
cut is in tangent, the balance is made up of curves, the general trace 
being gently sinuous. The Cape Cod Bay approach has a bottom 
width of 300 feet; that in Buzzards Bay a bottom width of 200 feet. 
Most of the land cut has a bottom width of 100 feet; but this is 
widened to 300 feet for the first 3,000 feet next to Cape Cod Bay, to 
200 feet for the next 4,000 feet, to 250 feet for distances of 800 feet 
each at two passing places near Bournedale and Bourne, respectively, 
and to 250 feet for the 1,500 feet next to Bourne Neck, where the canal 
enters Buzzards Bay proper. In the submerged approaches side slopes 
of 1 on 3 are adopted, with low-water depths of 26 feet. In the land 
cut the side slopes are 1 on 2 from the bottom at — 25 up to about — 8 
feet, where there is a berm about 25 feet wide. Above this the slopes 
are 1 on 2, protected with riprap up to about 10 feet above mean 
high water. 

There are at times differences of elevation of the water surface of 
Cape Cod Bay and Buzzards Bay amounting to several feet ; but the 
engineers of the canal do not anticipate difficulty from the resulting 
currents, either to navigation or to the cut itself, and no tide locks 
are therefore provided m the existing plans of the Cape Cod Canal. 

Whether the route from Point Judith to Boston via the Cape Cod 
Canal, including, as it does, about 90 miles of exposed water, can 
properly be called an intracoastal route is open to question. The 90 
miles is composed of two sections, separated by the long, safe anchor- 
age of Buzzards Bay. The southern section, about 60 miles long, 
passes for most of the way close to safe harbors of refuge, and the 
northern section has one harbor of refuge at Plymouth. 



LNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 35 



Even if the Cape Cod Canal route can be classed properly as "intra- 
coastal," there still remains the question whether a partially com- 
pleted sea-level cut on which work is in active progress can be con- 
sidered by the board as u an existing public or private canal." To 
buy under such conditions seems contrary to public policy and to 
good business principles. Private citizens of the United States have 
in good faith taken up the question for themselves and have decided 
that they can invest certain sums in making a canal for commercial 
uses, looking to the tolls on anticipated commerce through their canal 
to pay the interest on their investment and eventually to repay the 
capital. In carrying out their project contracts have been let and 
liabilities have been incurred. A compulsory sale would involve 
litigation, claims, and delays in opening the waterway for navigation. 
If it were not for the prospect of the early opening of the Cape Cod 
Canal route to commerce, the board feels that public sentiment in 
Boston might be in favor of having the United States take up the 
construction of some canal to do away with the present dangers of 
the passage around Cape Cod. Steps that would delay the opening 
of the Cape Cod Canal should be avoided. When the canal is com- 
pleted, and navigation through it is a fact, the question of the advisa- 
bility of putting in a tide lock or of omitting, it will also receive a 
definite and exact answer. Congress can then take up the matter, 
and under the power of eminent domain can acquire the completed 
canal at a price based upon known facts and proportioned to its 
utility as indicated by the amount of commerce paying tolls. 

The board therefore reports that at the present time it is not 
advisable for the United States to construct an inland canal between 
Taunton and Boston nor to utilize the partly constructed Cape Cod 
Canal, and therefore it appears unnecessary for the board to report 
at this time on the probable cost of acquiring the Cape Cod Canal. 

For convenience of reference the following table is appended, show- 
ing the cost of the several routes upon which surveys were made in 
sufficient detail to afford a basis for reliable estimates: 

Estimated cost of various types and dimensions of canals between Narragansett Bay and 

Boston. 



Description. 



Lock canal, 35-foot summit, bottom width 200 feet: 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Hingham Harbor . 

Annual cost of maintenance 

Lock canal, 35-foot summit, bottom width 125 feet: 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Hingham Harbor. 

Annual cost of maintenance 

Lock canal, 20-foot summit, bottom width 200 feet: 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 

Annual cost of maintenance 

Lock canal, 20-foot summit, bottom width 125 feet: 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 

Annual cost of maintenance 

Sea-level canal, bottom width 200 feet: 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 

Annual cost of maintenance 

Sea-level canal, bottom width 125 feet: 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 
Annual cost of maintenance 



Depth of water. 



18 feet. 



329, 590, 000 
807,120 

24, 955, 000 
807,120 

20, 570, 000 
561,400 

17,453,000 
561,400 

35, 696, 000 
441,400 

28,429,000 
441,400 



25 feet. 



$40,047,000 
836, 120 

32,470,000 
836, 120 

26, 848, 000 
591,400 

21,678,000 
591,400 

47,133,000 
473,400 

37,420,000 
473,400 



36 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



NARRAGANSETT BAY LONG ISLAND SOUND SECTION. 

Between April 3 and 15, 1909, a preliminary line was marked out 
on the ground and a rough stadia survey was made of it for the pur- 
pose of obtaining an approximate profile for use of the board in its 
examination of the proposed route on April 28, 1909. 

The board, after carefully going over the ground, directed that sur- 
veys be made and estimates prepared for a canal along the prelimi- 
nary line selected, and also that alternative lines be examined and 
surveyed at a few places where more than one line appeared feasible. 
The board further directed "that in making these surveys and esti- 
mates, the depth of 18 feet with a minimum bottom width of 125 feet 
be considered as the basis and that the borings be made to give such 
additional data as may be conveniently practicable providing for 
subsequent deepening. It also directed that where the same can be 
done without any unreasonable additional expense, estimates on the 
same surveys be prepared for a canal with a depth of 25 feet." 

SCOPE AND METHODS OF THE DETAIL SURVEYS. 

In general the detail surveys covered a width of at least 1,000 feet 
along the proposed route, while in several places, such as through the 
ponds, the width was'over 4,000 feet. 

Field work for these surveys was begun June 23, 1909, and was 
completed December 31, 1909, except the borings, which were com- 
pleted August 8, 1910. The force employed varied from one to five 
field parties, besides an assistant in charge, a draftsman, and one or 
two other men in the office. For the topography, stadia methods 
were used exclusively, based on a system of triangulation connected 
with the Coast Survey and on a line of spirit levels carefully run in 
duplicate over the entire route. In the hydrographic work, sound- 
ings were usually located by two transits on shore. 

The datum plane used was mean low water at Newport, R. I., as 
established previously by several years of tidal observations. 

A working map on a scale of 1 : 4,000 was first made, from which 
the final sheets on a scale of 1 : 10,000 were prepared by pantograph 
reduction. 

From July to December, 1909, tidal observations were made in 
Narragansett Bay near Bissells Cove and in Little Narragansett Bay 
at Watch Hill, the two termini of the line, by self-recording gauges. 
The results of these observations are given in a table on each of the 
final maps and are sufficient to show that in the proposed canal, 31 
miles in length and passing through several large ponds, no currents 
will be produced that would affect navigation materially. Estimates 
have been prepared for a canal of 18 feet depth with a minimum 
bottom width of 125 feet through the land portion and 250 feet 
width in the approaches and in the ponds traversed, and the figures 
in the text of this report refer to a canal of these dimensions. In 
addition, as directed by the board, estimates have also been made 
for a canal of 25 feet depth with a bottom width of 200 feet through 
the land portions and 300 feet width in the approaches and ponds. 

DESCRIPTION OF ROUTE SELECTED. 

The proposed canal extends from the west side of Narragansett 
Bay, about a mile below Wickford, to Fishers Island Sound, Lying at 



INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, NY O. 37 



the eastern end of Long Island Sound, following in a general way a 
natural route parallel to the southern coast of Rhode Island, through 
valleys, tidal ponds, and across low divides within the towns of 
North Kingston, Narragansett, South Kingston, Chariest own, and 
Westerly. The total length of the line between waters of 18 feet 
depth at the two ends is 35.6 miles, of which 4.9 are approach chan- 
nels, 19.4 are in tidal ponds and rivers, 2.3 are in salt marshes, and 
9 are through lands above high tide reaching a maximum elevation 
of 50 feet. 

Beginning at the eastern end of the route in the protected waters 
of the Western Passage of Narragansett Bay between Fox Island and 
the mainland, a channel of approach of about three-fourths of a mile 
in length is required to enter the canal proper at the shore of Bissells 
Cove, just below the village of Hamilton. From Beaver Tail Light, 
at the mouth of Narragansett Bay, to this point of beginning, a dis- 
tance of 8 miles, the natural depth of water is over 30 feet; and a 
depth of 25 feet is available up the bay from this point to Providence 
and Fall River, distant 20 miles and 27 miles, respectively. A 2^. -foot 
depth to Fall River is also available by a route that is only 18 miles 
long. 

Crossing Bissells Cove, a shallow body of water three-tenths of a 
mile wide at the mouth of the small Nannacatucket River, the line 
continues a mile farther in a southwesterly direction through a 
narrow ridge, reaching a maximum elevation of 50 feet, and follows a 
wooded swamp southerly past Carr Pond to tide water at the head of 
Pattaquamscott Pond, a distance of 2.5 miles in all. The elevation 
of this swamp varies from 20 to 13 feet. A very narrow gravel ridge 
having an elevation of 40 feet must be cut through just below Carr 
Pond. 

Pattaquamscott Pond and River, through which the canal extends, 
lie in a deep valley about 1.5 miles west of Narragansett Bay, and 
are separated from the latter by a high ridge called Boston Neck. 
The pond is more than 60 feet deep in places and very little exca- 
vation will be required for a distance of 2 miles. Through the 
river below and across the " Cove, "north of Narragansett Pier, for a 
distance of 4 miles, the water is shallow, but the bed is sand and can 
be easily excavated by hydraulic methods. 

From the southwest end of the "Cove" the route across a ridge 
1.4 miles wide, between Narragansett Pier and Wakefield, with a 
maximum elevation of 48 feet, passes just south of Silver Lake in 
Wakefield and enters the upper part of Point Judith Pond, a large 
body of tidal water, with an average depth of about 6 feet. 

Continuing southwesterly two-thirds of a mile further across the 
upper arm of this pond and a narrow peninsula separating it from 
the main pond, the line swings southerly again and extends 2.5 miles 
down the main pond in water averaging nearly 6 feet in depth. 
At the foot of the pond and near the head of the breachway connecting 
it with the Harbor of Refuge at Point Judith, a sharp turn to the 
westward is made, and from thence the southerly shore of Rhode 
Island is nearly paralleled all the way to the western terminus of the 
canal. 

Leaving Point Judith Pond, the line crosses a sand flat and marsh 
two-thirds of a mile wide, and continues for another two-thirds of a 
mile through the shallow waters of Potter Pond to the small but 



38 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

growing summer village of Matoonoc. For 2 miles more the route 
is through flat open country, rising to a maximum elevation of 22 
feet and sloping gently to the westward to Trustom Pond, a lagoon 
three-fourths of a mile long without permanent connection with the 
ocean and almost dry at low water. Near the middle of Trustom 
Pond the line deflects slightly to the south, in order to reduce as much 
as possible the work required on the half-mile cut through Green 
Hill. By so doing, the maximum elevation through the hill will be 
only 19 feet instead of the 35 feet that would be encountered upon a 
straight line. 

West of Green Hill for a distance of 3 miles the route is through 
the low lands, marshes, and coves on the south side of Green Hill 
Pond and Charlestown Pond, and thence continues for 2.2 miles 
through the middle of Charlestown Pond, averaging 3 feet in depth, 
to Quonocontaug Neck. After crossing Quonocontaug Neck, two- 
thirds of a mile in width and reaching 18 feet elevation at its highest 
point, the middle of Quonocontaug Pond is traversed nearly its 
entire length of 2 J miles in water averaging 9 feet in depth. 

Beyond is Noyes Neck, or Weekapaug, a ridge nearly a mile wide 
with a maximum elevation of 45 feet on the line of the canal. The 
next stretch is through Brightman Pond, nearly 2| miles long and 
averaging 2.5 feet deep. Following this is the last cut through the 
land north of Watch Hill for a distance of If miles, with an elevation 
reaching 45 feet at one point. 

The line proper ends at Colonel Willies Cove, in Little Narragansett 
Bay at the mouth of Pawcatuck River, whence a channel of approach 
4.1 miles long to deep water in Fishers Island Sound, opposite Ston- 
ington, Conn., will be made, following the present 10-foot channel 
through Little Narragansett Bay. 

ALTERNATIVE LINES SURVEYED. 

At the eastern end of the proposed canal, where it enters the land 
on the southwest shore of Bissells Cove, an alternative location for 
the first mile of the route is feasible, following the west branch of the 
valley. This course, however, would be slightly longer, would require 
additional and sharper curvature with reverse curves, and would 
encounter about 125,000 cubic yards more ledge than the direct 
route, and therefore was rejected. 

Across the ridge, between the cove and Point Judith Pond, a line 
through Silver Lake was considered. While a reduction of over 
500,000 cubic yards of excavation in sand and gravel could be made 
by such a change, the lake with its water surface at elevation 20 
would be practically destroyed, and the damages to the valuable 
estates surrounding it would probably more than offset the saving in 
excavation. Also an additional drawbridge would be required if 
highway accommodations were made equal to those by the route 
selected. 

Between Trustom Pond and Green Hill Pond three routes were 
surveyed; one around the north of Green Hill through a wooded 
swamp, another straight across the hill halfway down its southern 
slope, and the third deflecting to the south and skirting the south 
end of the hill. Of these the last is the most favorable, as it requires 
the least excavation of both earth and rock, and introduces no sharp 



IN TR AC ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 39 



curves. The northerly route has the greatest amount of excava- 
tion as well as the most curvature and greatest length. 

Three routes were also considered and surveyed for crossing 
Quonocontaug Neck; one a short distance back from the beach, the 
second a mile from the beach, and the third about halfway between 
the other two. The third is the cheapest, requiring the least expense 
for excavation, and involving no excessive land damages. It was 
therefore adopted. 

A choice of two lines through the land cut at Watch Hill necessi- 
tated surveys of both. One route crosses near the south shore in the 
midst of the summer residences, where land damages would be very 
high, while the other line lies a mile or more from the shore and 
north of the residential section, where land has not been subdivided 
and would therefore be comparatively inexpensive. 

The saving of 595,000 cubic yards excavation in sand and gravel 
possible by the first route would not equal the saving in excessive 
property damage by the second. Also serious objections to the 
canal are certain to be made by summer cottage owners if it extends 
through their quiet settlement. 

For the approach channel at the westerly end of the canal a route 
directly across Little Narragansett Bay and Napatree Point just 
north of Fort Mansfield was surveyed in addition to that selected fol- 
lowing the present 10-foot channel north of Sandy Point. The direct 
route would be shorter and would avoid several angles in the channel, 
but the sand cut through Napatree Point would require jetties at one 
and perhaps at both ends in order to maintain it, so that the saving in 
excavation would be more than counterbalanced by the cost of jetty 
construction. Another point in favor of the route selected is the fact 
that it passes behind the Stonington outer breakwater, where a secure 
harbor is afforded for anchorages or for making up tows. 

In addition to the above alternative lines the board directed that 
there be made "such surveys and estimates as may be necessary for 
making the entrance to the canal from Narragansett Bay, south of 
Boston Neck, near Narragansett Pier, in such a manner as to show the 
cost of the canal from Narragansett Bay at this point to the waters of 
Fishers Island Sound, without that portion of the line to the north of 
this entrance/' 

The results of these surveys and estimates show that the cost of the 
canal having its eastern terminus at Bissells Cove would be 
$12,322,000. The canal with its eastern entrance just north of Nar- 
ragansett Pier will cost $11,399,000; but the exposed entrance, 
together with the reach of open water between it and the protected 
waters of Narragansett Bay would interfere seriously with the use of 
the canal in rough weather, when the benefits from it should be the 
greatest. Moreover, it is doubtful if a canal with only this entrance 
could be considered as coming properly within the requirements of the 
act of Congress which specifies a waterway " inland where practicable." 

CHARACTER AND DISPOSITION OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL. 

Commencing at the eastern end of the canal and going westward, 
the materials encountered and the proposed disposition of the 
excavated material may be described as follows: 

At the outer end of the approach channel the material is mud and 
sand, which gradually changes to sand and gravel with a few bowlders 



40 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, IT. 0. 

toward the shore and across Bissells Cove, This excavation, amount- 
ing to about 635,000 cubic yards, can be handled by clamshell and 
dipper dredges and deposited by scows in deep water east of Prudence 
Island or near Beaver Tail, in Narragansett Bay, requiring a tow of 
6^ to 9^ miles. 

The cut through the land between Bissells Cove and Pattaquamscott 
Pond is mostly sand and gravel (3 076 000 cubic yards) with about 
331,000 cubic yards of rock below elevation 5.0 underlying the 
northerly half. It is proposed to use the greater part of the sand and 
gravel overlying the ledge to fill in a portion of Bissells Cove east of 
the canal line and to build out an area into Narragansett Bay 
around and south of Romes Point. The remainder of this material 
can be spoiled in low lands and hollows adjacent to the canal and in 
the deep water of the upper Pattaquamscott Pond. With the aid of 
pumps to keep the site free from water, it is probable that the ledge 
can be excavated in the dry, and at a much less cost than in the wet. 
Part of the rock will be needed at once for a wall around the area of 
new land, to be built near Romes Point, and the remainder will be 
available for slope protection either immediately or as soon as the 
canal banks have assumed their natural slopes. 

Through Pattaquamscott Pond less than 450,000 cubic yards of 
excavation will be required, all being sand and gravel, which can be 
deposited in the deep water of the pond. In Pattaquamscott River 
below the pond and across the cove the 3,767,000 cubic yards of 
material is sand and fine gravel, capable of being handled by hydraulic 
methods and disposed of on the adjacent marshes. 

Across the Wakefield divide 2,490,000 cubic yards of sand and 
gravel will have to be removed, about one-half with steam shovel and 
cars and one-half by hydraulic dredges. The only available dumping 
pi ace for the cars is on the marshes toward the west end of the cove, where 
a large part of the dredged material can also be spoiled, the remainder 
going into Long Cove on the east side of Point Judith Pond. 

In Point Judith Pond the 3,128,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel 
can be pumped into the coves on both sides of the line and upon the 
extensive marshes at the lower end of the pond. All the material in 
the sand flats and marshes beyond Point Judith Pond and in Potter 
Pond can be pumped upon the marshes on the south side of the canal, 
and these marshes will also hold all of the excavation through Matoo- 
noc as far as Trustom Pond if it can not be otherwise disposed of. 

The canal, however, from Matoonoc nearly to Charlestown Beach 
is located only about 500 feet on an average from the shore of the 
ocean, and the simplest method of disposing of the sand and gravel 
excavation would be by pumping it directly upon the beach, thus 
saving about 5 cents per yard on over 2,000,000 yards so handled. 

If the material is not pumped out on the beach, that in Trustom 
Pond and that in the easterly half of Green Hill (except the ledge in 
the latter) may be deposited in the shallow waters of Trustom Pond 
north of the canal line, thus forming several acres of new land. 

The ledge rock underlying Green Hill, which it is estimated will 
amount to 64,000 cubic yards, can be used at once for slope protec- 
tion, or stored along the cut until it is needed for that purpose. The 
sand and gravel in the cut through the westerly half of Green Hill 
and through Green Hill Pond, amounting to over 1,000,000 cubic 
yards, can be spoiled in the coves and marshes north of the canal at 
the east end of the pond. Nothing but sand and gravel is indicated 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 41 



throughout Charlestown Pond, all of which may be placed on the 
marshes and in shoal waters on the south side of the pond. 

On Quonocontaug Neck a considerable quantity of ledge was 
found below elevation —5, overlaid with sand, gravel, and numerous 
bowlders. In some places the surface of the ground is literally cov- 
ered with bowlders, large and small, so that the method of handling 
the work will differ from that in any other portion of the canal. All 
of the material overlying the ledge can be wasted upon the marshes 
I south of the canal at the east end of Quonocontaug Pond. The ledge 
; can be excavated in the dry by resorting to pumping to keep the cut 
free from water, and the rock can be stored along the banks if not 
: needed immediately for slope-protection work. 

Through Quonocontaug Point the material is similar to that across 
the neck, viz, sand, gravel, bowlders, and ledge. Some of the 
bowlders may require blasting, but most of them can be removed by 
dipper dredges. The material containing no bowlders can be pumped 
upon the marshes on the south side of the pond, while that containing 
bowlders can be removed by dipper dredges and deposited in deep 
holes prepared for it by hydraulic dredging outside of the line of the 
canal. The rock excavation being all below reference — 10 could 
well be left until the canal was nearly completed and then used for 
slope protection at various places along the route. 

Across Noyes Neck it is estimated that about 635,000 cubic yards 
of ledge rock will be encountered, in addition to nearly 1,000,000 
cubic yards of sand and gravel containing a few bowlders. The 
latter can be removed by steam shovels and dredges and deposited 
on the marshes and flats at the east end of Brightman Pond, while 
the ledge rock which it is proposed to excavate in the dry can be 
stored until needed along the banks and in a cove at the northwest 
corner of Quonocontaug Pond. 

In Brightman Pond the material is sand and gravel, amounting 
to 2,205,000 cubic yards, which can be removed by pumping and 
placed on the marshes on the south side of the pond. 

The cut between Brightman Pond and Colonel Willies Cove is 
composed of sand and gravel with a few bowlders. A part of this 
excavation can be used to fill up several small ponds and low places 
to the south of the canal, a part can be deposited on the marshes on 
the south side of Brightman Pond, and a part on the marshes on the 
east side of Little Narragansett Bay south of Colonel Willies Cove. 

The excavation in the approach from Colonel Willies Cove to 
Fishers Island Sound is mostly in sand and gravel. Some of this 
material may be pumped ashore on the marshes along the line, but 
the greater part of it will have to be dumped in deep water in Fishers 
Island Sound. A few bowlders will be found west of Pawcatuck 
Point and a larger number will be encountered east of this point and 
extending into Colonel Willies Cove. Off Pawcatuck Point a small 
area of ledge exists which will have to be broken up prior to removing 
by dredging. 

BRIDGES AND FERRIES. 

The proposed canal crosses 20 highways of more or less importance, 
4 single-track electric railways and one single-track steam railroad. 
As all the bridges across canal must be drawbridges, it is important 
that the number be reduced to the minimum that will accommodate 
the travel. Accordingly, where the highways are near together, it is 



42 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C, 



proposed to provide one bridge to serve two or more and to build short 
stretches of connecting roads. All of the railroads except one electric 
line can be carried across on bridges used for highway purposes. 

The style of bridge decided upon by the board is the bascule type, 
giving a clear opening of 150 feet. It is desirable that the clear 
height under the bridges when closed be as ^reat as possible, or at 
least be sufficient to allow most of the smaller pleasure craft that 
will use the canal to pass beneath without opening the draw. This 
will not only avoid occasional delays for such boats but will also 
lessen the delays to travel over the bridges. All the bridges can 
be arranged so as to have a clear height of at least 16 feet above 
mean low water, and some of them will have considerably more 
than this height. 

For several of the highways over which there is almost no travel 
except during the summer months the expensive construction and 
maintenance of a drawbridge appears unwarranted. Instead, it is 
believed that a small ferry, operated by cables and a gasoline engine, 
with one attendant, could be designed and built to fulfill all the 
requirements of travel at these roads for about one-eighth the cost 
of a bridge. The cost of such a ferry complete, with slips and their 
appurtenances, would not exceed $12,000. The success of this type 
of crossing could be tested by installing one during the early part of 
the construction work, and its defects could be remedied by the time 
others were required. 

CROSSINGS. 

The following table shows the railroad, trolley and highway, and 
highway bridges to be constructed over the canal, and the proposed 
railroad and highway changes along the route of the canal as further 
indicated on the detail map : 



Crossing. 



Near south end 

Bissells Cove. 
k mile south 



of 



Head of Pattaquam- 
scott Pond. 

Pattaq uamscott 
River. 

800 feet southwest of 
the cove. 

East of Silver Lake. 

Matoonoc 

Moonstone Beach . . . 



Charlestown Beach.. 
Q nonocontaugNeck . 
Noyes Neck 



Pleasant View . 



Near Colonel Willies 

Cove. 
Narrow River 



Type. 



Elec trie 
railroad. 
Highway . 

Road 



j Highway . 

{Highway, 
railroad, 
and trol- 
ley. 

Highway . 

...do 

...do 



..do 

..do 

..do 

Highw a y 
and trol- 
ley. 

..do 



.do. 



Bridge. 



Double-track 

draw. 
Draw 



Ferry . 
Draw. 



.do 



.do 



Ferrv . 
do. 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



Draw. 
....do. 



Present 
angle to 
normal . 



30 
25 



10 
10 

23 
54-30 
60 

30 
50 



10 



10 



Length of 
track or 
road re- 
location. 



Feet. 
3,300 

3,600 

4,000 

13,200 

1,600 
2,600 
3,600 

3, 400 
8,500 



200 
5,200 
6, 400 

10,600 

1,700 

1,700 



Clear- 
ance at 
mean 
low 
water. 



Feet. 
21 

31 



16 

31 

36 



20 



Remarks. 



Crossing to be moved 256 feet 
nearer Bissells Cove. 

Road to be straightened and 
made normal to canal line. 

Ferry to be located 350 feet 
north of present crossing. 

{This bridge to replace Bridge- 
town bridge and Middle 
Bridge. 

(Combined bridge to carry 3 
roads across new waterway. 
Bridge makes angle of 35* 
30' with normal. 
( Carries 2 highways over new 
1 waterway. 

Matoonoc Road during year. 
West Road at Card Ponds 
summer only. 

Ferry replaces 2 roads. 
Do. 

(2 highways and 1 trolley 

\ road. 

Do. 

1 highway and 1 electric 
line combined to replace 
bridges— 1 railroad pile 
trestle and 1 highway wood 
truss. 



Tola! estimated cost, $1,258,000 



I INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 43 

WATER POWER. 

No water sufficient for generating power for lighting any portion 
of the canal is available along or near the route. 

The only water power that will be in any way interfered with by 
the construction of the canal is that at Hammonds Mill on the 
stream flowing from Carr Pond into the upper end of Pattaquamscott 
Pond. (See local map sheet No. 1.) This is a small grist mill op- 
erated intermittently, according to the demands of the farmers for 
several miles around who have long been accustomed to bring their 
grain there for grinding. When running, it uses about 30 cubic feet 
of water per second under a head of about 9.5 feet, thus developing 
about 33 gross horsepower. The drainage area tributary to this 
stream is about 7 square miles, which, upon the basis of 1.65 cubic 
feet per second per square mile as the average run-off available 
throughout the year, would make about 12.5 horsepower available 
continuously. 

The canal will cut off this stream just east of the main body of 
Carr Pond, and destroy the power at the present site. It is proposed, 
however, to maintain the pond at its present elevation of about 13.5 
feet by building a dam across the narrows which separate the main 
pond from the swamp through which the canal passes. If found 
desirable, a water power about equal to that destroyed could be 
developed at this dam, but the amount seems hardly sufficient to 
make it advisable. 

It is planned to make the dam wide enough to carry the proposed 
road extending north along the west side of the canal from the pro- 
posed ferry below to the cart path in the woods to the west as de- 
scribed above. The estimated cost of the dam and the road is 
$10,000. 

BREACH WAYS INTO THE PONDS. 

Four of the ponds, Point Judith, Charlestown, Quonocontaug and 
Brightman, through which the canal passes are connected directly 
with the ocean by breach ways, all having a certain similarity and 
yet each differing from the others in physical characteristics. 

The breach way into Point Judith Pond is the only one that has 
sufficient depth of water for boats larger than skiffs and that appears 
to be worthy of being maintained. Through this entrance about 7 
feet at low water is now available into the lower end of the pond 
as far as the line of the canal. There is a considerable movement of 
sand in the breach way, caused partly by the unstable banks and partly 
by the littoral drift from the west. The littoral drift will be stopped 
when the westerly shore arm of the Point Judith Breakwater, now 
authorized, is constructed, and when the canal is built it is proposed 
to riprap the banks of the breach way to protect them from under- 
mining, using stone that will be available from places along the 
route. What further treatment, if any, is required, can be best 
decided by a study of the conditions after the canal is completed. 

The three other breach ways are useful chiefly for introducing and 
circulating in the ponds more or less salt water for the benefit of 
shellfish. As a supply of water much greater than that now existing 
will be furnished to the ponds by the canal, no improvement of these 
breach ways is at present contemplated. 



44 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The breach way into Charlestown Pond is nearly closed at its 
inner end, so that the ordinary rise and fall of the tide in the pond is 
only 0.1 foot. At Quonocontaug Pond the water is very shallow on 
the south side where the breach way enters, and less than 0.3 foot is 
the average tide. 

In Brightman Pond a very narrow artificial channel exists, which 
provides a tide of about 4 inches in the pond. 

TERMINALS. 

At the eastern end of the canal (see Local Map Sheet No. 1) there is 
an excellent opportunity to make a small harbor and provide terminal 
facilities in Bissells Cove by dredging out the cove on both sides of 
the canal, and constructing wharves on the western and southern 
sides, thus forming a basin over 700 feet wide and about 3,000 feet 
long. The small stream called Nannacatucket River, which enters 
the cove from the west and now discharges into Narragansett Bay 
at the extreme eastern end of the cove through a channel 100 feet 
wide and 2 feet deep, is too insignificant to cause any strong currents in 
the new basin or in the canal entrance. 

As the canal will form a new and greatly enlarged outlet for the 
waters of the cove, it is proposed to close the present outlet and to 
fill in a part of the cove east of the canal in order to provide greater 
wharf frontage. 

The full development of the project would, in all probability, not 
be required for several years after the completion of the canal, and 
only a portion ($100,000) of the cost has been included in the canal 
estimate. This will provide for about half of the basin and wharf 
space in the western part of the cove, and the building of bulkheads 
on both sides of the entrance through the spit on the north side of 
the cove to make the passage easy for vessels. 

In Colonel Willies Cove, at the western entrance of the canal, no 
terminal work is at present contemplated other than the widening of 
the approach and the construction of guiding bulkheads leading to the 
entrance. Sufficient land should be acquired around the cove for 
any wharf facilities that may be required in the future, but it is prob- 
able that the demand for such facilities will not be urgent for a con- 
siderable time. No anchorage ground or waiting place for vessels 
using the canal is needed at the cove, as ample accommodations of this 
nature exist behind the Stonington Breakwaters and in Stonington 
Harbor, at the western end of the approach channel. 

The costs stated in the following summary estimates are based on 
thorough detailed studies of each locality in which character of soil, 
length of haul to dump, etc., were considered. 

Summary of estimate for sea-level canal, Bissells Cove to Fishers 
Island Sound: Depth, 18 feet; bottom width, 125 feet in land cuts, 
and 250 feet in ponds and approaches; with an auxiliary entrance at 
the mouth of Narrow River 18 feet in depth and 100 feet bottom 
width, with protecting jetty extending to 20 feet depth of water at 
mean low tide in Narragansett Bay. 



INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 45 



Excavation. 

31,699,000 cubic yards sand, gravel, etc (average 129) $4, 100, 350 

1,635,800 cubic yards ledge rock (average 2.52) 4, 277, 700 

Total, cubic yards, 33,334,800 $8, 378, 050 

Slope protection, 308,000 cubic yards, at $2.50 770, 000 

Bridges, ferries, and roads 1 1, 258, 000 

Land damages 2 465, 000 

Breakwater at mouth of Narrow River to 20 feet depth of water 108, 600 

Miscellaneous items, including lighting, telephone line, etc 222, 200 

11, 201, 850 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent 1, 120, 150 

Total 12,322,000 

Summary of estimate for sea-level canal, Bissells Cove to Fishers 
Island Sound: Depth, 25 feet; bottom width, 200 feet in land cuts, 
and 300 feet in ponds and approaches, with an auxiliary entrance at 
the mouth of Narrow River 18 feet in depth and 100 feet bottom width, 
with a protecting jetty extending to 20 feet depth of water at mean 
low tide in Narragansett Bay. 

Excavation. 

55,354,000 cubic yards sand, gravel, etc. (average 13) $7, 202, 750 

3,995,000 cubic yards ledge rock (average 3.11) 12, 426, 500 

Total 59,349,000 cubic yards $19, 629, 250 

Slope protection, 318,000 cubic yards, at $2.50 795, 000 

Bridges, ferries, and roads 1 1, 258, 000 

Land damages 2 . 465, 000 

Breakwater at mouth of Narrow River to 20 feet depth of water 108, 600 

Miscellaneous items, including lighting, telephone line, etc 232,000 



22, 487, 850 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent 2, 248, 785 



Total 24,736,635 

Summary of estimate for sea-level canal, mouth of Narrow River 
(north of Narragansett Pier) to Fishers Island Sound. Depth, 18 
feet; bottom width, 125 feet in land cuts and 250 feet in ponds and 
approaches, with a harbor sheltered by large breakwater at Narragan- 
sett Bay end. 

Excavation. 

25,524,690 cubic yards sand, gravel, etc. (average 132) $3,355,869 

1,415,868 cubic yards ledge rock (average 3.04) 4,309,545 



Total cubic yards 26,940,558 $7, 665. 414 

Slope protection, 238,000 cubic yards, at $2.50 595, 000 

Bridges, ferries, and roads 3 930,000 

Land damages 2 315, 000 

Breakwater at mouth of Narrow River 485, 000 

Basin in the Cove: 85 acres; with bulkheads (partial development) 272, 000 

Miscellaneous items, including lighting, telephone line, etc 100, 500 



10, 362, 914 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent 1, 036, 291 



Total 11,399,205 



1 If the State pays for road changes, this item will be reduced $125,000. 
* If the State pays for land damages, this item will be eliminated. 
3 If the State pays for road changes, this item will be reduced $80,000. 



46 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Summary of estimate for sea-level canal, mouth of Narrow River 
(north of Narragansett Pier) to Fishers Island Sound: Depth, 25 
feet; bottom width, 200 feet in land cuts, and 300 feet in ponds and 
approaches, with a harbor sheltered by a large breakwater at Narra- 
gansett Pier end. 

Excavation. 



44,333,000 cubic yards sand, gravel, etc. (average 131) $5, 781, 290 

3,490,000 cubic yards ledge rock (average 3.23) 11, 272, 500 



Total, 47,823,000 cubic yards $17, 053, 790 

Slope protection, 248,000 cubic yards, at $2.50 620, 000 

Bridges, ferries, and roads 1 930, 000 

Land damages 2 315, 000 

Breakwater at mouth of Narrow River 485, 000 

Basin in the cove; 85 acres; with bulkheads; (partial development) . . . 362, 000 

Miscellaneous items, including lighting, telephone line, etc 110, 500 



19, 876, 290 

Engineering and contingencies, 10 per cent 1, 987, 710 



Total 21, 864, 000 



Estimated cost of annual maintenance, $160,000. 

AMOUNT OF COMMERCE AFFECTED. 

In the Newport engineer district, during the calendar year 1908, 
there was carried by water to and from the localities undergoing 
improvement by the United States a total of 6,587,177 tons of 
freight valued at $215,009,093, of which 4,587,763 tons valued at 
$26,073,351 was coal and other fuel. Of this, 1,637,915 tons of 
freight valued at $7,574,492 was carried to and from points east of 
Narragansett Bay, to New Bedford and points along the Vineyard 
and Nantucket Sounds, and would probably be less affected by the 
construction of the canal than that going into the bay. 

The part entering and leaving Narragansett Bay was 4,949,262 tons, 
valued at $170,944,159, of which 3,342,992 was coal and other fuel, 
valued at $18,498,857. In thus distinguishing between the freight- 
bound for Narragansett Bay and that going east to the Vineyard and 
Nantucket Sounds, it should be stated that a large part of the coal 
included in the latter is brought into Narragansett Bay in tows, a 
portion of which remains there and the balance is carried to the east, 
involving a trip from Point Judith into Newport and out to Brentons 
Reef again, so that tows to be so operated would probably be bene- 
fited to a small extent by the use of the proposed canal. 

Careful investigation of the cost of coal in Providence places 
anthracite at $5.65 per long ton and bituminous at $3.70 per long ton 
in the yard. 

PRESENT DELAYS. 

Tows of barges coming through Long Island Sound — and most of 
the anthracite coal bound for Narragansett Bay comes in that way — 
are frequently detained at the eastern end of the Sound, and at New- 
port in returning, a considerable time awaiting favorable weather to 
make this passage. The delay at times amounts to a week or more, 
and one case during the past year is cited by the Board of Trade of 



1 If the State pays for road changes, this item will be reduced $80,000. 
* If the State pays for land damages, this item will be eliminated. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 47 

Providence in which a delay of three weeks occurred at New London 
awaiting favorable weather. 

During the year 1910, the log of the tug W. E. Gladwish, of the 
Keeler Transportation Co., shows that she was delayed 738 hours 
waiting at Newport or New London for suitable weather to go around 
Point Judith. The required time as given by the master for the 
round trip from New York to Providence, without delays, is 90 
hours east and 30 hours west, 120 hours, so that by reason of this 
delay 6.15 round trips were lost. The boat towed during the year 
in 24 round trips about 57,000 tons of coal, or 2,365 tons per trip, 
so that the cost of delays was equivalent to the loss of freight on 
about 14,545 tons at 40 cents per ton, about the average rate, or 
$5,818. 

The tug Elmer A. Keller of the same line lost 438 hours between 
March 1, 1910, and January 1, 1911, waiting for weather suitable 
to go round Point Judith. The time required for this tug to make 
the trip east is 60 hours and for the trip west 28 hours, or 88 hours 
for the round trip, so that 5 trips were lost during the period. The 
Keeler towed 130,807 tons to Narragansett Bay in 43 trips, or 3,042 
tons per trip, so that the delays were equivalent to the loss of freight 
on 15,210 tons, or $6,084, during the 10 months she was engaged 
in the work. 

With a protected way and uninterrupted trips these two boats 
could have towed 217,562 instead of 187,807 tons which were towed, 
and assuming a 40-cent rate on what was actually towed, the cost 
of the larger amount would have been 34.4 cents per ton, a saving 
of 5.6 cents per ton. The passage through the exposed portions 
of the route requires from 12 to 15 hours. Changes of weather 
conditions during this time of transit have caused the total loss of 
many box barges, and the elimination of this marine risk would 
permit a considerable further reduction in freight rates. 

Large quantities of bituminous coal are brought from Philadelphia, 
Baltimore, and Norfolk in barges of a build sufficiently substantial 
to withstand a considerable sea voyage, towed by costly sea-going 
tugs. The construction of the New Jersey section would bring 
Philadelphia 140 miles nearer Providence by water than at present, 
and, with the Rhode Island canal, would afford a protected way which 
would permit the use of light types of both barges and towboats. 
The addition of the Delaware section in like manner would bring 
Baltimore 250 miles nearer Providence by water and would make 
both Baltimore and Norfolk accessible by the protected route. 

The freight rates as quoted in the Coal Trade Journal of January 
11, 1911, from New York to Providence are 35 cents to 45 cents; 
Philadelphia to Providence, 70 cents to 75 cents; Baltimore, 75 
cents to 80 cents; Norfolk, 70 cents to 75 cents. The distance from 
Philadelphia by sea is about 400 statute miles and by canal would 
be about 260 miles, a saving in distance of about 35 per cent; assum- 
ing the rate to be based on the distance, a corresponding reduction 
of the Philadelphia rate would result in a rate from 45.5 cents to 
48.6 cents. The Baltimore distance by sea is about 600 miles and 
by canal about 350 miles, a saving of nearly 42 per cent, and upon 
the same assumption the rates by canal would be from 43.5 cents to 
46.4 cents. The present ton-mile rates from Philadelphia are rather 



48 INTEACOASTAL WATEEWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

higher than those from Baltimore as determined from these pub- 
lished rates. The Norfolk distance would not be materially changed 
by reason of these two canals, but the insurance rates would be less. 

The chief function of the Rhode Island section in relation to the 
southern coal traffic would be to complete the protected waterway 
from the south into the waters of Narragansett Bay, with the previ- 
ously mentioned decrease of cost of freight carriage. 

At the present time the railroads practically control the freight 
movement between New York and Narragansett Bay. This is due to 
various causes, one of which is the difficulty of obtaining wharfage 
space at the terminals and another is the large capital required for the 
type of boat needed. Providence and New York are now endeavoring 
to supply greater public-wharf space. A protected water route would 
diminish the investment required in ships, thus stimulating compe- 
tition. 

The report of the Division of Statistics and Accounts of the Inter- 
state Commerce Commission for the year ending June 30, 1907, gives 
the ton-mile railroad revenue for Group I (New England) as 1.145 
cents, the highest in the United States excepting Group X (Cali- 
fornia). The average ton-mile railroad revenue for the whole United 
States is given as 0.759 cent and that for the New York, New Haven 
& Hartford Railroad alone is given as 1.436 cents. 

The citizens of Pawtucket, where a very large amount of freight 
originates, contemplate the establishment of an independent line, and 
the American Electrical Works, at Phillipsdale, on the Pawtucket 
River, are now running a line of small steamers to and from New York 
for their own freight, which during 1910 transported 25,317 tons; 
but these small vessels experience considerable delay on account of 
storm conditions and are often obliged to await favorable weather at 
Dutch Island and New London. 

The Providence Board of Trade states as the reason why shipments 
by rail are greater than by water from Providence: 

Rail shipments to this territory far exceed the water-borne freights. The reason 
for this is that greater expedition is secured for all-rail shipments, while there is 
lamentable lack of bottom to carry by water. Rates by rail are acknowledged to 
be much higher than by water; but the uncertainty of securing water-borne con- 
signments on time, because of lack of merchant marine and the liability of delays 
through storms and stress of weather, causes a preference for all-rail transportation. 
Cotton men, in particular, say that they order their consignments forwarded by rail, 
even at greater cost, rather than risk delay of arrival. 

The great consideration is the demand for dispatch and the ability 
to run on schedule time without the delays incident to stormy 
weather. It is stated by the Providence Board of Trade that the 
total freight transported by rail and water in Rhode Island during 
1909 was 18,000,000 tons. More than 95 per cent of the total 
product of its manufacturing establishments was shipped out of 
the State, and to a very great extent by rail. The value of these 
manufactured products was $275,000,000. The outgoing freight 
by water was comparatively small, and is estimated as approxi- 
mately 600,000 tons, of which 362,776 tons were shipped from 
Providence by steamer. 

The question as to the estimated proportion of freight that would 
be earned by water if the Rhode Island canal were constructed 
is stated by the same authority as hardly possible of being answered 
satisfactorily. Transportation agents of recognized ability and 



IN TR AC O AST AL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 49 

authority " agree, however, that its construction would result 
in a very large quantity of merchandise being forwarded via the 
waterway, not only in the form of cotton, coal, and other raw 
material, but as the finished products of Rhode Island and New 
England industries, destined for the cities of the South and West to 
be reached by the intracoastal waterway, and which could be 
| shipped by the canal at much less expense to the consumer/ ' 

Apparently the water rates on package freight are maintained at 
i the present high figures more with a view to approximating the 
| railroad rates than to affording a reasonable profit on the cost of 
j transportation. It is claimed by the Board of Trade of Providence 
that the distribution of coal from Providence is falling off and more 
is being delivered by all rail from the mines. An illustration of 
the method by which this is made profitable is given in a report on 
the " Buying and Handling of Steam Coal/' by the committee on 
fuel supply of the Boston Chamber of Commerce, in which the 
all-rail rate from Pittsburgh to Worcester, Mass., is given as $3.10 
per ton, and the rail and water route between the same points as 



follows: 

Pittsburgh to Philadelphia $1. 65 

Vessel rate, Philadelphia to Providence, March, 1909 50 

Cost of discharging and weighing 21 

Rail rate, Providence to Worcester 85 



Total rail and water 3. 21 



For purposes of comparison the ton-mile rates of the above would 
be about as follows: 

Pittsburgh to Philadelphia, about 354 miles, ton-mile rate 4.66 mills. 
Philadelphia to Providence, about 400 miles, ton-mile rate 1.25 mills. 
Providence to Worcester, about 44 miles, ton-mile rate 19.32 mills, and the 19.32 
mills rate is after payiDg a charge of 21 cents for transfer. 
Pittsburgh to Worcester, about 635 miles, ton-mile rate 4.88 mills. 

It is stated by the manager of one of the largest coal carrying con- 
cerns in New England that the railroads maintain a r»te for coal 
from New York to Boston of 50 cents per ton, and exceptional rates 
of 65 cents per ton by barge have been paid. 

Inquiry has been made as to the views of individuals and corpora- 
tions believed to be interested in the project and 86 replies have been 
received. Of these 30 were in favor of the proposed canal, 11 were 
opposed, 23 expressed no opinion from lack of knowledge or lack of 
interest in the project, and 22 indicated reference to committees to 
communicate at a later date. 

The arguments from the sources in favor of the canal, the most 
elaborate of which is from the Providence Board of Trade (see Appen- 
dix B 1), are in general terms that a population estimated at 3,000,000, 
including Boston, woiild be benefited; that the freight carried from 
and to Rhode Island is about 18,000,000 tons per year; that of this 
about 5,000,000 tons is carried by water; that the construction of 
the proposed canal would greatly increase the shipments by water 
and would decrease the freight rates from 20 to 66§ per cent; that 
there would be a saving in time and insurance, especially if the whole 
chain of canals were built; that capital for industrial development 
would be attracted to the line of the canal with increase of popula- 
tion and general benefit and that it would greatly contribute toward 
the saving of life and property. The arguments of those who oppose 

22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 4 



50 INTEACOASTAL WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



the canal are that it would be closed by ice in winter, give slower 
transportation, factory sites are not needed, no development of manu- 
facturing would take place, there would be no saving of time or 
insurance, canal would not be wide or deep enough, expenditure not 
justified, and railroad rates are now as low as water rates. . \ 

The arguments in favor of the canal come from the Providence 
Board of Trade, the mayors of the cities of Pawtucket and Central 
Falls, R. L, the Business Men's Association, Merchants' Association, 
and large coal and lumber dealers and users in Pawtucket. the Penn 
Gas Coal Co., of Philadelphia; Progressive Harbor No. 9, American 
Association of Masters, Mates ; and Pilots, Norfolk, Va.; the Massa- 
chusetts State Board of Trade, the Worcester (Mass.) Board of Trade, 
and many individual dealers and users of materials brought to and 
shipped from Narragansett Bay and its vicinity. 

The principal arguments opposed to the canal are from the Board 
of Underwriters of New York, whose president states : 

Our surveyors, who are ex-sea captains, make the following report: 
"At least four and one-half months of the year the northern part of the canal would 
be closed by ice, and this, too, at the most stormy time of the year, when vessels should 
have the most need of such a waterway. The extra time used in steaming or towing 
through a canal is also a great factor. The opening up of manufactories and the general 
development of the country requires more careful study and attention than the mere 
fact of a canal as above indicated. This country is interwoven with railroads and 
natural waterways. Factory sites can be obtained at small cost near the water fronts 
to last the country for the next century; at least such is our judgment. The coastwise 
fleet can take care of this trade and be enlarged from time to time as required. From 
a strategic point of view, in case of war, a small quantity of dynamite could be effec- 
tively used to close up the canal. ' ' Considering the enormous cost of this undertaking, 
they do not think that our Government would be justified in building it. However, 
if the canal is to be built, by all means make it as deep as possible to admit ships of 
the greatest draft. This is the judgment of these ex-mariners, who seem to have 
clear vision of what the requirements should be. This is the best information we can 
give you on the subject. 

Mr. W. G. Besler, vice president and general manager of the Central 
Railroad of New Jersey, states: 

Proposition No. 1, which calls for a canal 18 feet deep and 125 feet bottom width, 
would be useless for our fleet of coal-carrying barges, for the reason that it is neither 
deep enough nor wide enough to be navigated with safety. 

Proposition No. 2, which calls for a canal 25 feet deep and a bottom width of 200 feet, 
would likewise be of no value in our business for the following reasons: 

The barges could not be towed tandem, as they are now handled, but would have to 
be towed three abreast, and as each bar<?e has a beam of 35 feet, which would make a 
tow 105 feet wide, it would not leave sufficient space for two tows to pass. One of our 
barges has a beam of 47 feet, and whenever this barge made the third in a tow, it 
would increase the width of the tow to 117 feet. 

Another matter to be considered is the probable cost to the vessels passing through 
this canal. The tolls would probablv amount to at least 4 or 5 cents per ton and at the 
present rate of freight received to all the eastern points I do not think that the time 
saved to our boats in passing through the canal would compensate for the increase in 
operating expenses. 

Communications addrrss^d to others of the large shipping and 
handling corporations have not been replied to other than by simple 
acknowle 'gnent or the statement that the inquiries had been re- 
ferred to certain d apartments of the company. 

With regard to what assistance might be expected from State or 
municipal governments in the execution of the project, there is sub- 
mitted herewith a lett<fr from Gov. A. J. Pothier, of Rhode Island, 
with accompanying papers. (See Appendix B 2.) 



IN TRAC AST AL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 51 

The objections offered to the construction of the proposed canal 
seem to be based on the theory that the existing means of water 
transportation are better adapted to existing routes than they would 
be to a canal, without consideration of the benefits to be derived from 
the development of an efficient type of vessel, especially suited to 
canal transportation, a vessel of low cost as compared with those 
built for service on the ocean. This has already been done in Europe. 

The danger of obstruction from ice during the winter months is 
not believed to be greater than in the quiet reaches of the rivers in the 
same latitude, nor in fact as great, in consequence of the water being 
more salt in the canal. The Taunton River in this vicinity is rarely 
closed by ice. 

Tows of barges in the passage now from New London to Newport 
have a speed which rarely exceeds 3 to 4 miles per hour, and unless 
the sea is very smooth the rate is even less. Such a rate is common 
in canals of the type and dimensions proposed. 

The depth of the canal has been placed at 18 feet to accommodate 
freight carriers drawing from 14 to 16 feet. Deeper-draft vessels or 
vessels moving at speed can take the outside route with safety. 

NEW YORK BAY-DELAWARE RIVER SECTION. 

The advantage of connecting the navigable waters of the Delaware 
River with those of New York Harbor, of joining by sheltered water- 
ways the markets and manufactures of the communities along the 
Delaware with the port of New York, and so with all of the territory 
commercially tributary thereto, has long been advocated. In 1830 
the Delaware & Raritan Canal Co. was incorporated by an act of the 
Legislature of New Jersey, and was authorized to construct a canal 
"from the waters of the Delaware River to the waters of the Raritan 
River and to improve the navigation of said rivers, respectively, as 
may from time to time become necessary, below where said canal 
shall empty into said rivers respectively to construct a feeder 
canal, and to make all auxiliary works necessary for the use of the 
canal and feeder. 

By an act of February 15, 1831, this company was consolidated 
with the Camden & Amboy Railroad and Transportation Co. The 
canal was constructed and opened to traffic in 1834. It was required 
to have a depth of 7 feet and a surface width of 75 feet. The locks 
were to be 100 feet long and 24 feet wide. Under acts of 1867 and 
1872 the joint companies operating the canal were consolidated with 
another company under the corporate name of the United New Jersey 
Railroad & Canal Co. In 1871 all the property of this company was 
leased to the Pennsylvania Railroad for a period of 999 years. The 
canal, as existing to-day, extends from the Delaware River at Borden- 
town to the Raritan River at New Brunswick, a distance of 43 miles. 
The feeder, which is also navigable, extends from Bull Island in the 
Delaware to the canal at Trenton, a distance of 22 miles. The main 
canal has a surface width of about 80 feet, a bottom width of 50 feet, 
and a depth of 9 feet. It has 13 locks, each 220 feet long and 24 feet 
wide, with a depth of 7J feet on the miter sill. The total distance 
from Philadelphia to deep water in New York Bay by this route is 
93 miles, of which 26 miles lie in the Delaware River, 43 miles are 
canal, and 24 miles are in the Raritan River and Bay. 



52 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The history of the canal shows a continuous growth of commerce 
with but few and unimportant setbacks to a maximum of 2,857,233 
tons in 1866, when the earnings were $1,294,156.69 and the operating 
and maintenance expenses $360,513.83. In that year the coal ton- 
nage was 2,282,203, or 83 per cent of the total. In 1872, immedi- 
ately after the lease to the Pennsylvania Railroad, the tonnage went 
up to 2,837,532 tons, but the earnings were $938,832 and the ex- 
penses $522,318. From the year of the lease the tonnage carried 
has generally declined. The total tonnage for 1909 amounted to 
400,000 tons; the revenue was $70,000; and the expenses $180,000. 
(Report of the committee appointed to investigate the Delaware & 
Raritan Canal, to the Senate of New Jersey, Apr. 18, 1911.) 

Various reasons have been given for the decline of traffic, the most 
potent of which is probably the fact that the dimensions of the canal 
are insufficient to pass boats of a size great enough for the econom- 
ical transportation of freight by water. 

The inadequacy of the Delaware & Raritan Canal to meet the 
requirements of the water traffic between Philadelphia and New i 
York led to an agitation for a new waterway. In 1894 the city 
council of Philadelphia passed an ordinance authorizing the mayor to 
appoint a commission to make surveys of a route for a ship canal 
between the Delaware River and the Atlantic Ocean and to submit a 
report and recommendations thereon, and appropriated $10,000 for 
this work. The commission made its report in 1895. It reported in 
favor of a route from Bordentown to the Raritan River near its 
mouth, following a line nearly parallel to the Pennsylvania Railroad 
and on the southeasterly side thereof to a point near Monmouth Junc- 
tion, where it turns easterly, passes down the valley of Lawrence Brook 
to Parsons Dam (which forms a long pond), thence northeasterly on 
higher ground to the Raritan River at Sayreville. The total distance 
by this route between Philadelphia and deep water in New York Bay 
is about 77.4 miles, of which 26 miles are in the Delaware River, 31.4 
miles require a canal, and 20 miles are in the Raritan River and 
Bay. From borings taken along the route it was found that be- 
tween the Delaware River and Princeton Junction the subsoil con- 
sists of sand, gravel, and clay to a depth of 28 feet above sea level; 
from Princeton Junction to near Milltown, red shale and sandstone 
'were found at various depths above +28; and from this point to the 
Raritan River, red shale and sandstone were found in a number of 
places above sea level. 

Plans and estimates were submitted for 2 sizes of canal prism ; one 
96 feet wide at bottom, 150 feet wide at water surface, and 20 feet 
deep in center for vessels not exceeding 18-foot draft; another 100 
feet wide at bottom, 184 feet wide at water surface, and 28 feet deep, 
for vessels not exceeding 26-foot draft. In both cases there was to 
be a berm on one side 12 feet wide. One level was proposed prac- 
tically from river to river at an elevation of 56 feet above mean sea 
level at Sandy Hook or 60 feet above low water in the Delaware near 
Bordentown. Both projects contemplated reaching this level by 
3 locks of 20-foot lift each, at each end of the canal. It was pro- 
posed to economize in both water and time by the use of locks of 2 
sizes for the 20-foot canal and an additional one, making 3 locks 
abreast, for the 28-foot canal. These locks were to have the follow- 
ing dimensions: No. 1, 205 by 24 feet with 10 feet on miter sill; 



I 

!, INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 53 

j No. 2, 340 by 44 feet with 20 feet on miter sill; and No. 3, 500 

! by 65 feet with 28 feet on miter sill. The slopes throughout were 

( to be made at the ratio of 1 J to 1, and the banks below water surf ace 
■ | were to be protected from wash by stone pitching. The locks were 

■i to be founded on piles, with timber grillage and flooring. The 

t masonry was to consist of ashlar facing, quoins, etc., with rubble 

• backing. The gates were to be of modern design of iron or steel. 

I The locks were to be filled and emptied by culverts and pipes, as well 
i as by valves in the gates, which, together with supply and discharge 

pipes, would be operated by hydraulic power applied in the usual 
i manner for such purpose. It was proposed to provide an electric 

plant with lights about the locks and at each quarter mile along 
i the canal line. Suitable buildings for machinery, attendants, etc., 

were also included. It was found that the country adjacent to the 
; canal was not suitable for the formation of an impounding reservoir 
! of sufficient capacity to supply the water required. Therefore, it was 

I I proposed to build a dam on the upper Delaware River and to enlarge 
the feeder of the Delaware & Raritan Canal, which it was presumed 
could be done under proper reservations as to the existing rights. 

The engineers' estimates of the cost of the work as outlined above 
was, for a canal with a depth of 20 feet, $14,574,000, and for a canal 
with a depth of 28 feet, $24,124,700. These amounts are for the 
canal section from the Delaware River near Bordentown to the 
Raritan River near Sayreville. The annual cost of maintenance was 
estimated at $250 000 in each case. 

The estimate for the 20-foot waterway includes both the smallest 
and intermediate size locks, or 12 locks in all, with 14 road bridges, 
2 railroad drawbridges on branch roads, reservoir, feeders, a dam 
covering 2 miles of channel, a tunnel, the right of way, and other 
contingencies. The only difference between the 20-foot canal and the 
28-foot canal was that the latter had 18 locks, while the former had 
but 12. 

The board was able to obtain the information concerning this survey 
through the courtesy of Prof. L. M. Haupt, engineer in charge of 
survey. 

PRESENT INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY PROJECT. 

In accordance with the recommendations of the Board of Engineer 
Officers-, constituted by paragraph 1, Special Order No. 10, Office 
Chief of Engineers, March 8, 1909, charged with the preparation of 
the project and report on the Boston-Beaufort inlet division of the 
proposed intracoastal waterway, the duty of making the survey for 
the portion of the route from New York Bay across New Jersey to a 
suitable point on Delaware River or Bay, was. on April 1, 1909, 
assigned by the Chief of Engineers to the New York district No. 1. 
The first work done was to make a general reconnoissance of that sec- 
tion of New Jersey through which the canal would run from the Del- 
aware River to New York Bay, covering an area of 350 square miles. 

The board believes that should a canal be built through this popu- 
lous and much -traversed section it must be located so as to eliminate 
as far as possible interference between the land and water traffic. 
Over the railroads between Philadelphia and New York passes all of 
the railroad traffic between the vast territory to the south and west 
tributary to the Pennsylvania and Baltimore & Ohio Railroad systems 



54 TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

and New York and the New England States. During a large part of 
each day the trains on the main trunk line of the Pennsylvania Rail- 
road run under a three-minute headway. Under such conditions the 
use of drawbridges becomes impossible. 

The board therefore laid down as a condition that the canal route 
should not cross any trunk-line railroad at grade ; that if a trunk line 
had to be crossed, the crossing must be at a point where either the 
railway could be depressed sufficiently to permit a canal of the maxi- 
mum depth probably to be required in the future to be built over the 
railway, or at a point where the railway could be elevated sufficiently 
to permit the construction of a fixed bridge with clear height under it 
sufficient for all classes of shipping using the canal. 

The board also believes that it is undesirable to have the canal pass 
directly through any large city on account of the interruptions to 
traffic in the streets and on the canal by reason of drawbridges, as 
well as of the cost of operation and maintenance of such bridges ; and 
that for any type of canal adopted the route selected should be such 
that the canal could be deepened and widened, or, if a canal with 
locks, converted to a sea-level canal at a minimum cost should navi- 
gation warrant such changes. 

A careful study was made of the route recommended by the city 
of Philadelphia, as outlined above, and a rough survey was made 
over it to verify the contours. It was found that at present there 
would have to be three railroad crossings, two crossings of an electric 
railroad, operated under a steam-railroad charter, which might be 
double-tracked at any time, besides two crossings of the proposed 
Pennsylvania freight line and three trolley crossings. One of the 
crossings of the proposed Pennsylvania freight line would come at a 
point where a bridge could be constructed only at very great expense 
to the canal project or with a serious change of grade of the railroad. 
It was also found that the rock formation between Princeton Junction 
and Monmouth Junction would make a sea-level canal impracticable 
on this route and that the cost of a canal on this route would be greater 
than the cost of a similar canal on a route farther to the east. After 
careful consideration this route was rejected. 

An investigation was made of the conditions of the existing Dela- 
ware & Raritan Canal with the view of determining whether this canal 
could be altered and adapted to modern requirements economically 
and advantageously. The following adverse conditions were found: 

(a) At New Brunswick the main trunk line of the Pennsylvania 
Railroad crosses the canal on a fixed bridge with a clear headroom 
beneath of 69 feet. The minimum headroom required to pass schoon- 
ers with lowered topmasts is about 105 feet. The railway can not be 
elevated without enormous expense and the canal level can not be 
lowered more than a very few feet. 

(b) At Trenton the main line of the Pennsylvania Railroad is again 
crossed. The tracks have been depressed and the canal crosses the 
line with a minimum of headroom beneath. At this crossing in 
Trenton, the railroad tracks are as low as it is practicable to place 
them under existing conditions. The canal depth is 7 feet. To 
obtain greater depth for the canal, the surface would have to be ele- 
vated. The property on the canal banks is very valuable and is 
utilized for factory sites. The cost of obtaining enough additional 
land to provide for a wider and deeper canal would be prohibitory. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 55 

Further study failed to show where another crossing under good 
conditions could be made. 

(c) For 12 miles this route uses the Raritan River and for 8 miles 
further skirts its banks. This stream is tortuous and subject to 
floods. The cost of improving the river, enlarging the canal and pro- 
tecting it would be very great. 

(d) For 16 miles the canal line skirts the Millstone River, where 
similar protecting works would be required. 

(e) In Trenton, in addition to the great cost of acquiring a right of 
way for an enlarged canal alluded to above, the canal is crossed by 
11 drawbridges connecting the streets cut by the canal line. The 
interruptions to street traffic by the very small existing canal traffic 
are a cause of annoyance and loss to both land and water commerce. 
This condition would be intolerable were the canal traffic much 
increased in volume. 

if) Though the line can be shortened without great expense by 
cutting across a long bend near its northern end, it yet would be 
longer than a route to the eastward, and since navigation through 
narrow channels must be slow, this becomes of importance. 

After a consideration of all of the above, the board decided that 
the adoption of this line would not be economical or advantageous. 
Surveys were then made from the Delaware River near Bordentown 
to Raritan Bay near Morgan, covering every feasible route between 
the proposed Pennsylvania freight line and the Camden and Amboy 
division of the Pennsylvania Railroad for canals with a summit 
level of 70, 80, 90, and 100 feet, and for a sea-level canal. In all, 
over 250 linear miles of ground were covered by the surveys. It 
was not necessary to make any surveys to the east of the Camden 
and Amboy division of the Pennsylvania Railroad between James- 
burg and Bordentown, as the ground rises to such a height that it 
would make the cost of any type of canal prohibitive. 

DESCRIPTION OF ROUTE SELECTED. 

The route selected runs from a point on the Trenton and Borden- 
town branch of the Camden and Amboy division of the Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad in a general northeasterly direction up the valley of 
Crosswicks Creek, to the highlands at Hutchinson mill pond; thence 
continuing in a general northeasterly direction through the highlands 
passing to the east of Edinburgh, about midway between Princeton 
Junction and Heightstown, and about 2 miles west of Cranberry to a 
point about 3 miles west of Jamesburg; thence in a general north- 
easterly direction, passing through the valley of Manalapan Brook 
and South River to a point 1 mile east of Runyon; thence continuing 
in a general northeasterly direction over the highland near Cheese- 
quake Creek and through the valley of Cheesequake Creek to New 
York Bay. The length of the line across New Jersey is 33.7 miles. 
This route was selected because it was the line of least resistance. 
It is also the cheapest route that could be found that fulfilled the 
requirements of the board for either a 70-foot lock canal or a sea- 
level canal. There are no bad bends to interfere with navigation; 
no towns are passed through; no rock was found along the entire 
length of the canal from the surface to a depth of 25 feet below mean 
low water, borings having been taken approximately every 1,000 



56 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOBT, N. C. 

feet. Throughout the route unused land is found where spoil can 
be wasted with short hauls. 

The streams which are crossed are insignificant and their maximum 
flood discharge can be carried across the canal line in inverted siphons 
with but slight difficulty and expense. At the northern end the 
approach is through the Raritan Bay (New York Lower Bay) and 
Cheesequake Creek, a small tidal creek not subject to floods. The 
Delaware is entered at Bordentown below the portion of the river 
subject to heavy ice gorges, below the portion of the bed formed in 
rock and where the tidal flow will permit river improvement to any 
desired depth. 

No trunk lines of railroads are crossed. At the south end the 
line is crossed by the Trenton and Bordentown branch of the Camden 
& Amboy Railroad, a local road with comparatively light traffic. 
This can be accommodated by a drawbridge. At Jamesburg the 
Monmouth Junction and Camden and Amboy divisions of the Penn- 
sylvania Railroad cross the line. The former carries a large express 
passenger traffic during the summer months as well as freight, 
which at Jamesburg passes to the Camden and Amboy division. 
The traffic of the latter road is mainly heavy freight. By the con- 
struction of about 6 miles of railroad it will be possible to form a 
junction of these two roads and carry them across the canal line on 
a bridge which will have a clear height beneath it of 110 feet, with 
grades and location, which the engineers of the Pennsylvania Rail- 
road state will be an improvement over the existing conditions. 

At the northern extremity, the line is crossed by the Long Branch 
division of the Central Railroad of New Jersey. This road, which 
has comparatively heavy traffic in the summer time only, can be 
accommodated by a drawbridge. Later, if necessary, it could be 
passed below the canal line by tunnel. 

The canal line enters and leaves the high land of the State through 
natural valleys, and between their extremities follows a series of 
slight depressions in the terrain. 

An examination was made of the subsoil of the section of New 
Jersey through which the canal passes. In all 211 borings were 
made, spaced about 1,000 feet apart and generally carried down to 
25 feet below mean low water of the ocean. The borings aggregated 
a total length of 11,945 linear feet. 

The only materials encountered were loam, sand, clay, and very 
little gravel, with a few bowlders near the Delaware River end of 
the canal. 

The absence of rock in the section of the country through which 
the canal passes is due to the fact that it follows the geological forma- 
tion known as "Pensauken Sound." (See pi. 1.) This also accounts 
for the absence of rock in the Delaware River, which will be spoken 
of later. Much assistance in making the canal line location was 
obtained form the excellent reports and maps of the New Jersey 
Geological Survey, and the board desires to acknowledge its indebted- 
ness to Dr. H. B. Kummel, director, for many courtesies shown. 

The location of the canal having been fixed, it then became necessary 
to determine the size and type of canal — whether sea level or lock. 
The board decided that a canal, to have commercial value, should 
have a bottom width of at least 125 feet; that the side slopes should 
be 1 on 2 from the bottom of the canal to a berm 15 feet wide, 15 



PLA TE NO. I 




/DURING the pensauken period 

THE UNSHADED AREA SOUTH OF FIRST 
MOUNTAIN WAS UNDER WATER. 



iIIlBe d co„ Hill 
ret a, team 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 57 

feet above low-water level; that above the berm the side slopes should 
be 1 on l\, with berms 10 feet wide at each 50 feet vertically. 

To determine the type of canal the board ordered comparative 
estimates to be prepared for a sea-level canal 125 feet wide, with 
depths of 18 and 25 feet, and for a lock canal of the same dimensions. 

Investigation showed that if a lock canal should be adopted, its 
summit level should be at an elevation of 70 feet, and should extend 
from near Jamesburg to White Horse, near Bordentown, with sea- 
level canal approaches, and that the summit level should be reached 
by a single flight of two locks of 35-feet lift each at each end. Ihe 
dimensions adopted for the lock chambers, as designed for both 
the 18 foot and 25 foot depths of canal, are 600 by 75 feet, with a 
depth over the miter sills of 27 feet. Intermediate gates are pro- 
jected, so placed as to make a flight with chambers having either 
175 feet or 375 feet usable lengths, and thus economize the use of 
water when small boats are to be passed. The gates were designed 
to be of metal, of the miter type, similar to those adopted lor the 
Panama Canal, and to be operated mechanically. The main culverts, 
15 feet in diameter, extend from fore bay to tail bay through the 
side walls and are provided with stoney gate valves. These are 
connected with the chamber by 7-foot culverts, spaced 30 feet apart 
and provided with cylindrical valves. The branch culverts pass 
across the lock in reenforced concrete floor slabs, having openings into 
the spaces between the slabs sufficient to cause the water level in the 
lock to change at the rate of 5 feet per minute. The walls are of 1-3-5 
concrete. Emergency gates are provided at each end of each flight. 
Guide walls 600 feet long, formed of concrete piers, spaced 10 feet 
apart and joined on top by a concrete pavement, are also provided 
at each end of each flight. The foundations of all of the walls and 
floors are on piles. 

The amount of water which would have to be supplied to the 
summit level daily was calculated to be 600,000,000 gallons. The 
discharge of the streams crossed was insufficient. It was also found 
to be impracticable to impound a sufficient supply in storage reser- 
voirs located within the State, and at a sufficient elevation to dis- 
charge into the canal by gravity. Two other sources of supply 
remained, i. e., by gravity flow from the higher levels of the Delaware 
River and by pumping. 

The Delaware & Raritan Canal feeder was gauged at Raven Rock, 
N. J., at the intake from the Delaware River, and also at a point in 
the feeder just above the entrance to the canal, and it was found 
impracticable to utilize any portion of this feeder as a means of sup- 
plying water to a 70-foot level. The Delaware River was gauged 
at Reiglesville, N. J., and at Byram, N. J., the flow being about 2,000 
cubic feet per second. A survey was then made along the Belvidere 
Division of the Pennsylvania Railroad from Reiglesville to Trenton 
to determine a route for a gravity system. It was found that by 
constructing a concrete dam 1,700 feet long across the Delaware 
River near Holland Station a feeder 51 miles long capable of carry- 
ing 980 cubic feet of water per second could be constructed. Such 
construction would necessitate the use of open cuts, rock tunnels, 
impound basins, reenforced concrete siphons, and overhead conduits 
to supply the requisite amount of water to the canal, namely. 
600,000,000 gallons per day. The cost of this feeder was estimated 



58 INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

at $10,000,000, which is somewhat greater than the estimated first 
cost of an adequate pumping plant plus the capitalized cost of operat- 
ing. Owing to the tunnels and sipnons, which would be imperative 
in a gravity feeder, and the fact that the lock canal might be con- 
verted into a sea level canal at any time and that this might be done 
at the expiration of the life of a pumping plant (which is about 10 
years), the board eliminated the gravity supply system, and the 
estimates for the lock canal were prepared providing for a water 
supply delivered by pumping. 

As noted earlier in this report, the canal line connects with the 
Delaware River at Bordentown in tide water, the mean tidal rang# 
there being 4.8 feet. The tidal movement in the river ceases at the 
falls at Trenton, 6.5 miles above Bordentown, where the mean range 
is about 4.5 feet. Although the lowest low-water discharge of the 
Delaware at Trenton is small, 1,300 feet per second, this tidal move- 
ment maintains the Delaware River under all conditions as far as 
Trenton as a noble stream, capable of improvement to any desired 
extent. 

From Philadelphia the river follows a general northeasterly course 
to Bordentown. As far as Mud Island, 2 miles north of the Phila- 
delphia city line, the channel has at present a minimum depth of 18 
feet with several long reaches in which a depth of 25 feet is found. 
North of Mud Island there is at present a minimum depth of 10 feet. 
Above this to Kinkora Bar, a distance of 22 miles from Philadelphia, 
a minimum depth of 12 feet now obtains. There is a depth of 10 
feet over this bar and above it a depth of 12 feet to within one-half 
mile of Bordentown. From here to Trenton a minimum depth of 
7 feet can be carried. In most cases the banks of the river are firm 
and rise abruptly from low water to an elevation of +10 or +15. 
Where this does not obtain they are generally well protected by 
vegetable growth and are subject to little change. 

The upper part of the river is subject to floods at intervals of 
from one to three years. The following is a table of the heights of 
floods at Bordentown, N. J. : 

Freshet heights at Bordentown, N. J. 



Date. 



Spring, 1676. 
March, 1692. 
Oct. 27, 1777. 
May 9, 1781 . 
Feb. 29, 1783 
Mar. 17, 1785 
Oct. 4, 1786.. 

1798 

1801 

Apr. 1, 1814. 
March, 1832. 
April, 1836.. 
April, 1839.. 
Jan. 8, 1841 . . 
Oct. 13, 1843. 
Oct. 13. 1845. 
Mar. 15, 1846 
Mar. 3, 1857. 
July 20, 1860. 
June 3, 1862. 



Elevation. 



14.1 
18.3 
13.4 
14.6 
13.8 
14.9 
14.1 
13.6 
13.9 
13.9 
11.7 
14.1 
18.0 
18.7 
13.9 
13.0 
15.6 
13.8 
14.0 
17.5 



Date. 



Oct. 15, 1869... 
Dec. 11, 1878... 
Oct. 21, 1879 . . . 

Mar. 2, 1882 

Apr. 14, 1885... 
Feb. 14, 1886. . . 
Apr. 1, 1886.... 
June 6, 1886.... 
Sept. 18, 1888... 
January, 1891. . 
Mar. 12, 1893... 

Apr. 9, 1895 

Feb. 6, 1896.... 

Mar. 1, 1896 

Mar. 2, 1900 

December, 1901 
Mar. 1, 1902.... 
Oct. 10, 1903.... 

1905 

1907 



Elevation. 



15.9 
16.1 
12.9 
13.4 
12.2 
13.1 
12.3 
11.8 
12.7 
12.1 
12.2 
15.3 
15.9 
11.7 
10.7 
15.2 
16.9 
19.8 
11.6 
12.7 



The original navigable depth of the Delaware between Philadelphia 
and Trenton was limited to 5 feet by numerous bars, caused mainly 



INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 59 



by river flood action, with deeper reaches between. At a few points 
shoaling is caused by an undue width of thalweg and at others by 
the existence of side channels. These conditions yield readily to 
treatment by dams and dikes. Improvements made in the past 
have increased the minimum channel depth to 7 feet, and in the 
river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, Congress has provided for a 
channel 200 feet wide and 12 feet deep from Philadelphia to Lalor 
Street, Trenton. 

In Lower New York Bay, at the north end of the canal line, the 
mean range of tide is 5.1 feet. The mean low-water level is 2.3 feet 
below the mean sea level of the Atlantic Ocean at Sandy Hook. The 
highest known high water reached reference 6.4 above mean low 
water at Sandy Hook (used as the plane of reference) ; the lowest 
recorded low water fell to —1.3 feet below the same plane. The 
time of high water is 7 hours 40 minutes after lunar culmination at 
New York. 

At Bordentown, as stated, the mean range of the tide is 4.8 feet. 
The mean low-water level is at +0.19 feet, referred to mean low-water 
level at Sandy Hook. The highest high water and the lowest low water 
recorded are at references 19.8 feet and —2.2 feet, respectively. The 
time of high water is 4 hours 7 minutes after lunar culmination at 
New York. 

To obtain some idea of what would be the rate of progress of the 
tidal wave through a sea-level canal, the recorded rate of progress 
through certain reaches of the Connecticut, Hudson, Savannah, and 
St. Johns Rivers were examined. The rate was found to be a func- 
tion of the depth, and the mean rate for a given depth was found to 
be expressed in the following formula, viz : 

v— .678 ^gh where v = velocity of tidal wave. 

g = acceleration due to gravity = 32.185. 
/*, = mean depth of water. 

From this it would appear that the tidal wave would pass through 
a sea-level canal 25 feet deep at the rate of 13.4 miles per hour and 
that 2.5 hours would be required for the wave to move from Borden- 
town to the north end of the canal, so that the wave propagated 
through the Delaware Bay by any one tide would meet the wave of 
the succeeding tide propagated through the Sandy Hook entrance to 
New York Bay, near the northern entrance of the canal. Further 
calculations showed that the resultant movement of water in such 
a canal would be to the north and that the maximum tidal currents 
developed would probably not exceed 1.27 miles per hour, but with a 
possible maximum of 3.2 miles. In other words, it was found that if 
a sea-level canal were constructed there would be little salt water 
which would pass into the Delaware River and that the tidal currents 
would be so small as to render their control by a lock unnecessary. 

It having been shown to be feasible to construct and operate a sea- 
level canal of the required depth, the estimates for a sea-level and lock 
canal were then compared. For this comparison, to the cost of the 
canal proper (omitting the cost of the bay and river sections) in each 
case was added the annual maintenance and operating charges 
capitalized at 3 per cent. 

Estimated cost of 70-foot summit-lock canal $49, 463, 500 

Estimated cost of sea-level canal 50, 635, 100 



60 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



After due consideration, it was decided that, inasmuch as the cost 
of a lock canal (including the maintenance capitalized at 3 per cent) 
was so little less than the cost of a sea-level canal, that the time re- 
quired for a ship to pass through a sea-level canal would be over one 
hour less than the time required to pass through a lock canal, and that 
the commercial bodies interested almost unanimously advocated a 
sea-level canal, the board decided to eliminate the lock and adopt a 
sea-level canal. 

The question of the most advantageous depth was then taken up. 
In yiew of the railroad facilities already existing, and of the failure of 
the Delaware & Raritan Canal, with its small depth and width to 
afford relief, it is the opinion of the board that a canal which would 
join the North and South Atlantic seaboards and connect directly 
two cities of such capital importance as New York and Philadelphia, ; 
if worth building at all, should have dimensions sufficient to permit 
boats of from 2,000 to 3,000 tons capacity to traverse it at a fair rate j 
of speed. Boats of this capacity will have a draft, loaded, of from 
14 to 16 feet, and a beam of from 30 to 50 feet. Experiment has shown 
that in narrow channels the minimum ratio which should exist 
between the cross-sectional area of the boat and channel, respectively, 
is 1:4, i. e., that the area of the cross section of the channel must be 
four times that of the submerged portion of the boat. The following 
generally accepted formula, also deduced from experiments, shows 
that the rate of speed of a boat driven economically is also a function 
of the relative cross sections of channel and boat. 

V^r^^Tr* D in which V= velocity of back flow not to exceed 
Q-AQ-q 

3 feet per second. 

AQ = the cross section between the sunken surface, due to the 
boat's motion and the normal water surface. 

q = the mean cross section of the boat. 

Q = the wet section of the canal. 

D = the velocity of the boat. 

Taking a boat 45 feet beam and 16 feet draft (the size required 
for a cargo of 3,000 tons) with the same channel width, the allowable 
speed for an 18-foot depth is 5.6 miles per hour, and for a 25-foot depth 
9.2 miles per hour, making a difference in the time of transit through 
the canal length of about three and three-fifths hours. The same 
results could be obtained by making the canal wider without increas- 
ing the depth, but in a deep cut, such as a sea-level canal would have 
on the alignment proposed, the cost of increased width is greater than 
the cost of increased depth; and the greater the depth below the 
keel, the more easily the boat can be steered and the less will be the 
harmful effect of the propeller on the bottom. 

Should the canal be constructed with an 18-foot depth, it is rea- 
sonably certain that within a few years there would be an impera- 
tive demand for an increase of depth. To allow for this, it is prob- 
able that .one or both side slopes would have to be disturbed, a 
serious matter in a deep cut, and one which affects the cost of main- 
tenance through a number of years. 

The estimated first cost of a sea-level canal 18 feet deep (con- 
sidering the canal proper only) is $40,336,615; that of a canal 
25 feet deep is $43,027,900. The cost of maintenance is about the 



INTEACOASTAL WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOET, 39". C. 61 

same for each. Considering all of the abDve, the board decided 
to recommend that the canal depth should be fixed at 25 feet, and 
that the approaches in New York Bay and in the Delaware River, 
as far as Bordentown, should be channels having a depth of 25 feet 
for a width of 100 feet, and of 18 feet for a width of 300 feet. 

From Bordentown to Trenton the branch channel should have a 
depth of 18 feet for a width of 150 feet only. 

For all the reasns given above, it is the opinion of the board 
that to fulfill adequately the demands of commerce the section of 
the proposed intracoastal waterway between deep water of New 
York Bay and deep water of the Delaware River should be in type 
and dimensions as follows: 

Beginning in the Delaware River near Allegheny Avenue, Phila- 
delphia, and proceeding north, there should be formed in the Dela- 
ware River a channel 300 feet wide, of which a width of 100 feet 
should have a depth of 25 feet at all stages and the remainder 
18 feet as far as the canal entrance at Bordentown, a distance of 
26 miles, and thence as far as Lalor Street, Trenton, a distance of 
3.9 miles, with a bottom width of 150 feet and a depth of 18 feet 
only at all stages. From the Delaware at Bordentown to Morgan, 
at the mouth of Cheesequake Creek, in the lower bay of New York, 
a distance of 33.7 miles, a sea-level canal should be excavated hav< 
ing a depth of 25 feet at the lowest stage, a bottom width of 125 
feet, and side slopes of 1 on 2 up to the level of +15 referred to 
mean low water at Sandy Hook, which is taken as the datum plane 
throughout. Above the level of + 15 the side slopes should be 
1 on 1J, with a 10-foot berm each 50 feet, measured vertically. 
Between the levels of —7 and +12, the side slopes are to be revetted 
with stone to a thickness of 1J feet, anchored at the base by sheet 
piling. 

From Morgan to deep water in New York Bay, a distance of 
12.1 miles, a channel to be dredged of dimensions the same as those 
recommended for the Delaware River. 

To guard against undue current* in times of freshets in the Dela- 
ware River, a lock should be built near the Bordentown end of the 
canal. The lock should be 600 feet long, have a clear width of 75 
feet and a depth over the miter sills of 25 feet at the lowest low water. 
Since it is believed that the use of a lock is necessary only during 
periods of freshets in the Delaware River, in order that there should 
be no increase of tidal currents at the lock due to a contraction of the 
canal prism when the lock is not in use, it is proposed to construct a 
navigable by-pass for use during such times, to be closed by a movable 
dam during the freshets. 

Auxiliary works which will be required are bascule lift bridges of 
150 feet span, for railroad, trolley, and ordinary vehicular traffic, an 
electric power plant of capacity sufficient to operate the lock and 
bridges and to light the canal; the construction of short stretches of 
highway to provide for roads for which separate bridges are not con- 
templated ; inverted siphons for conveying intercepted streams across 
the canal; the construction of short stretches of railroads and trolleys, 
where existing lines must be changed; a system of lights for the canal; 
a telephone line; a line of fences along the right of way; and jetties 
at the New York Bay end of the canal. 



62 IN TEA COASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The work proposed and the estimates of cost in greater detail are 

as follows: 

No rock is found along the entire length of the canal. The cost of 
excavating the soft materials found will vary with the methods which 
can be used, and these methods will vary with the elevation at which 
these materials lie referred to the general datum plane, the plane of 
mean low water at Sandy Hook. In general, locations for spoil banks 
can be found all along the canal line and the excavated materials can 
be conveyed to such localities at small expense — by pumping and 
rehandling or by cars. With reference to the cost of excavation, 
materials fall into four classifications, as follows: 

Class A. Materials which lie between the canal bottom and zero, 
and which can be excavated and handled by pumping, for which the 
cost is estimated at 10 cents per cubic yard. 

Class B. Materials between zero and + 15 to be excavated by dry 
or wet dredging and rehandled, for which the estimated cost is 15 
cents per cubic yard. 

Class C. Materials above +15, to be excavated in the dry and 
hauled by cars to a spoil bank. Estimated cost 20 cents per cubic 
yardc 

Class D* Materials to be dredged and rehandled. Estimated cost 
20 cents per cubic yard. 

Delaware River section. — The survey of the Delaware River from 
Allegheny Avenue, Philadelphia, to Lalor Street, Trenton, was made 
under the supervision of Maj. Herbert Deakyne, Corps of Engineers, 
in charge of the Delaware River improvement, and paid for mainly 
from the funds allotted for the intracoastal waterway surveys. 

The approved project for the improvement of the Delaware River 
between the limits named contemplates the formation of a channel 
12 feet deep and 200 feet wide, by dredging and dike construction, at 
an estimated cost of $327,000. The work is now under contract. 
Three dikes are to be built, one at the head of Biles Island, to restrict 
the waterway back of Biles Island to a flow only sufficient to prevent 
stagnation; a second from the lower end of Duck Island to the New 
Jersey shore above Borden town, to contract the unduly wide channel; 
and a third between the upper end of Mud Island and the Pennsyl- 
vania shore, closing a back channel. 

As stated earlier, the canal project calls for a channel 25 feet deep 
at the lowest stages for a bottom width of 100 feet, and 18 feet deep 
for a remaining bottom width up to 300 feet, with side slopes of 1 on 2 
as far as Bordentown. From there to Trenton the bottom width 
is 150 feet and 18 feet deep at lowest stages. The proposed channel 
generally follows the line of the channel now being made, deviating 
from it only at points where a more direct line across a bar seems 
economical and at points where the natural river contours appear 
more favorable for the increased depth required for the canal. Five 
dredged cuts will be required. The material in the bed of the river 
is generally mud and fine sand in the lower portion, becoming coarser 
and harder as the river is ascended. Some clay is found, the amount 
of clay being greater as the distance below the natural bottom 
increases. Most of the material can be removed by hydraulic 
dredging and pumped ashore. Locations for spoil banks can be 
found quite generally along the river banks. The sand and gravel 



IN TK AC OA S TAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 63 



from the upper river has a saleable value for building purposes 
The dredged cuts required are as follows: (a) Opposite Philadelphia, 
length 10,150 feet, volume 97,000 cubic yards; (5) opposite Wrights 
Corner, length 9,100 feet, volume 227,000 cubic yards; (c) between 
Torresdale and Beverly, length 16,150 feet, volume 710,000 cubic 
yards; (d) between Beverly and Bordentown, length 56,900 feet, 
volume 3,616,000 cubic yards; (e) from Bordentown to Trenton, 
length 20,300 feet, volume, 1,004,000 cubic yards. 

The total volume of dredging is thus 5,654,000 cubic yards. Its 
cost, estimated as Class D, is $1,130,800. Eleven dikes are required. 
These generally are designed to be of the same type as those m suc- 
cessful use for many years in the Hudson River. They consist of 
two rows of sheet piling, reenforced by round piles at intervals of 
5 feet, and tied and braced and cut off about 1 foot above low-water 
line. Stone is filled between the rows, and the crest of the stone 
pile is 3 feet wide and at the level of 4 feet above ordinary tidal high 
water. From the piling to the crest the side slopes and crest are 
faced and paved with concrete to prevent injury by moving ice. 

The locations and lengths proposed for the dikes are as follows: 

(a) At Mud Island a dike is to extend from the Pennsylvania shore 
out and down the river with a length of approximately 7,000 feet; 

(b) at Delanco, a dike connecting Rancocas Neck with the New 
Jersey shore, length 850 feet; (c and d) two wing dikes at Delanco, 
length of lower 1,050 feet, of upper 1,000 feet; (e and/) at Beverly 
two wing dikes from the New Jersey shore, lengths 800 and 950 feet, 
respectively; (g) a dike extending from the Pennsylvania shore out 
and down the river, length 4 600 feet; Qi) near lower end of Burling- 
ton Island, a wing dike, length 1,100 feet; {%) between the upper end 
of Burlington Island and the New Jersey shore, a submerged dike, 
with top at reference — 7, length 500 feet; (j) opposite Roebling a 
dike extending out and downstream from the Pennsylvania shore, 
length 2,100 feet; (k) from Duck Island to New Jersey shore near 
Bordentown a dike in a broken line with an aggregate length of 
5,100 feet. 

The total length of dikes deemed necessary is 25,050 linear feet. 
The cost estimated at $13 per linear foot is $325,650. It is believed 
that this estimate is sufficient to cover the cost of all dike work 
required. The exact location, length, and elevation to be given to 
individual dikes are subject to such changes as may be determined 
by experience as the work progresses. 

The canal section begins at Bordentown and the distances are 
measured from the center of the bridge of the Trenton and Borden- 
town branch of the Camden and Amboy division of the Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad over Cross wicks Creek near Bordentown. 

From station + 00 to station 6 + 600 the elevation does not rise 
above +5. The material is sand and clay and will be Class A and 
Class B excavation. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A.... 1,131,358 

Class B...„. t 147,266 

From station 6 + 600 to station 9 + 300 the canal line passes 
through a high neck of land of which the maximum elevation is +64. 
This cut is rendered necessary to avoid a bend in the line so sharp as 



64 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



to prove an obstruction to navigation. The material of the cut is 
sand and clay and will be Class A, Class B, and Class C excavation. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A , 481,550 

Class B 366,412 

Class C 1,658,979 

From station 9 + 300 to station 17 + 100 the elevation is between 
+ 5 and +30. The material is sand and clay and will be Class A, 
Class B, and Class C excavation. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 1,595,636 

Class B 789,979 

Class C 162,112 

At station 17 + 100 there is to be an emergency lock and by-pass. 
This emergency lock is to have an available length of 600 feet, and an 
available width of 75 feet with a lift of 22 feet. The depth over the 
miter sills is to be 27 feet at mean low water. Other details are given 
later in this report. 

Excavation for lock and by-pass, Class C, 807,228 cubic yards. 

From station 18 + 100 to station 90 + 000 the elevation is between 
+ 40 and + 90 feet. The material is sand and clay and will be Class 
A, Class B, and Class C excavation. The material can be spoiled 
on nearby waste land. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 12,849,290 

Class B 10,483,790 

Class C 80,317,629 

From station 90 + 000 to station 112 + 000 the elevation is between 
+ 70 and +135 feet. The material is sand and clay and will be 
Class A, Class B, and Class C excavation. The material can be 
spoiled on nearby waste lands. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 3, 938, 000 

Class B 3,214,200 

Class C 34,685,524 

From station 112 + 000 to station 122 + 600 the elevation is between 
+ 30 and +70. The material is all sand with layers of quicksand 
and will be Class A, Class B, and Class C excavation. This material 
can be spoiled on nearby waste land. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 1,779,700 

Class B 1,453,800 

Class C 2,927,133 

From station 122 + 600 to station 153 + 600 the elevation is between 
+ 10 and +25. The material is mostly sand with a few layers of 
clay smd will be Class A, Class B, and Class C excavation. This 
material can all be deposited directly back of the canal. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 5,574,100 

Class B 4,096,100 

Class C 867,089 

From station 153 + 600 to station 162 + 300 the canal line passes 
through the high lands near Cheesequake and reaches an elevation of 
+ 88. The material is sand and clay and will be Class A, Class B, 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 65 



and Class C excavation. This material can be spoiled on Cheesequake 
Meadows. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 1,512,700 

Class B 1,235,500 

Class C 2,935,978 

From station 162 + 300 to station 164 + 200 the elevation is between 
+ 7 and + 15. The material is sand and clay and will be Class A and 
Class B excavation. This material can all be pumped in Cheesequake 
Meadows. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 368,750 

Class B 179,604 

From station 164 + 200 to station 174 + 600 the elevation is between 
+ 7 and +25. The material is sand and clay and will be Class A, 
Class B, and Class C excavation. This material can be spoiled on 
Cheesequake Meadows. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 68,023 

Class B 55,560 

Class C 36,260 

From station 174 + 600 to station 176 + 000 the elevation is about 
+ 6. The material is all clay and will be Class A and Class B excava- 
tion. This material can be spilled on Cheesequake Meadows. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 2,014,990 

Class B 604,005 

From station 176 + 000 to station 177 + 880, which is the end of the 
canal section, the elevation is all below zero. The material is mostly 
clay with a few layers of sand and will be Class A excavation. This 
material can be spilled on Cheesequake Meadows. 

Cubic yards. 

Class A 237,441 

Total excavation: 

Class A ' 31,551,538 

Class B 22,626,216 

Class C 124, 397, 932 

Total cost of excavation $31, 428, 672. 60 

BRIDGES. 



The proposed canal crosses 34 highways of more or less importance, 
3 single-track trolley roads, 3 double-track and 1 single-track steam 
railroads. 

As all the bridges across the canal must be drawbridges, it is 
important that the number be reduced to the minimum that will 
accommodate the travel satisfactorily. Accordingly, where the high- 
ways are near together it is proposed to provide one bridge to serve 
two or more and to build stretches of connecting roads. All the 
trolleys are to be carried across the canal on combination highway 
and trolley bridges. The style of bridge decided upon by the board 
is the bascule lift type, giving a clear opening of 150 feet. The high- 
way bridges will have a roadway 18 feet wide. 

It is desirable that the clear height under the bridges be as great as 
possible, or at least be sufficient to allow most of the small pleasure 
craft and tugs with barges to pass through without lifting the draw. 

22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 5* 



66 INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOET, N. C. 

This will not only avoid occasional delays for such boats, but will also 
lessen the delays to travel over the bridges. In order to accomplish 
this, a niinimuni clearance of 24 feet at normal high water has been fixed, 
which is the minimum allowable clearance on the Harlem River. 

The following table shows the railroad, trolley, and highway and 
highway bridges to be constructed over the canal, also the proposed 
railroad and highway changes along the route of the canal. (For 
further information see detail maps.) 



Crossing. 



0+00... 

4+ 240.. 

9+ 075.. 

14+650. 

22+150. 
26+ 550. 
27+350. 
32+700. 
37+850. 

44+200. 

44+800. 
47+600. 
51+600. 



55+140 

From 55+140 to 

62+450. 

62+450 

From 62+450 to 

71+400. 

71+400 

72+ 700 



77+800 

From 80+750 to 
84+600. 

89+350 

95+200 



97+750 

From 99+900 to 
104+200. 



104+700. 
109+700. 

109+740. 
111+500. 
115+950. 

116+650. 
121+950. 



Type. 



Railroad . 
....do... 



Highway and trol- 
ley. 

....do 



Highway, change. 

....do 

Highway 

do 

do 



Highway, change 



Highway. 
do... 



do 

Highway, change. 

Highway 

Highway, change. 

Highway 

Highway, change. 

Highway 

Highway, change. 

Highway 

Highway, change. 

Highway 

Highway, change. 



Railroad. 
do... 



Highway 

Highway, change. 
Railroad 



130+670 

Between 140+000. 



141+200. 
142+100. 

153+650. 
160+900. 
176+280. 

1764-850. 



Highway. 
do... 



.do. 
.do. 



Highway. 

do... 

Railroad. 



Highway and trol- 
ley. 



Bridge. 



None. 
1 
1 
1 

None. 

None. 
1 
1 

None. 
None. 



None. 
1 

None. 
1 

None. 



None. 



None. 



None. 



None. 



None. 
None. 

1 

None. 



Present 
angle to 
normal. 



Degrees. 
50 



60 

65 
60 

5 
10 

5 



20 
60 



90 

5 
90 

10 



80 



30 
25 



60 



10 
60 

60 
45 



Length 
of track 
or road 
reloca- 
tion. 



Feet. 



10,000 

200 

1,500 

6,250 
1,350 
100 
500 



4,200 
""600 



7,250 



6,050 

500 
2.200 

600 
9,500 

700 
3,000 

600 
11,650 



32,740 



45 
45 
10 



1,750 
1,200 



600 
3,800 



600 
1,000 
7,000 

1,600 



Clear- 
ance at 
mean 
low 
water. 



31 
64 
31 



74 
94 



74 
94 
94 
94 
74 



94 
94 



110 
64 



34 



31 
31 



31 
74 
31 

31 



Remarks. 



Proposed crossing at sta- 
tion 4+240. 

Double-track bridge; 
single-track road. 

Camden and Trenton; 
Yardville-Trenton. 

Proposed bridge at sta- 
tion 14+770. 

Crossing at station 

' 27+3.50. 



No road construction 

necessary. 
Crossing at station 

47+600. 



No road construction 

necessary. 

Road constructed on 
west side of canal. 

Do. 



Crossing at station 
71+400. 

Road constructed on east 
and west side of canal. 

Crossing at station 
97+750. 

Road constructed on 

both sides of canal. 
[Proposed crossing at sta- 
I tion 109+ 700 for all 
I Pennsylvania R. R. 
[ trains; double track. 



Proposed crossing at sta- 
tion 109+700. 

No road construction 

necessary. 

Bridge at station 
141+200. 

Road constructed on east 
side. 



Double-track bridge; 

single-track road. 
South Amboy-Keyport. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 67 



SUMMARY. 



15 highway bridges and 10,300 feet of approach SI, 963, 959 

57,000 feet new highway construction , . - 51, 300 

3 combination highway and trolley bridges and relocating of 3,300 feet of trolley and highways . . 328, 034 

3 double-track railroad bridges 672, 246 

7.52 miles of double-track railroad 225, 600 

1.9 miles of single-track railroad 38, 000 



T-tal 3,279,130 



SIPHONS. 

In order to provide for the discharge of the streams crossing the 
canal line without interference with their flow, it is proposed to con- 
struct inverted siphons at Miry Run, Assinpink Creek, Bear Brook, 
Millstone River, Cranberry Brook, and Tennents Brook, and to carry 
the water under the canal. The siphons are to be reenforced concrete 
construction, composed of 2 separate pipes, each capable of carrying 
off the storm run-off. Each siphon will be supplied with a valve at a 
point slightly above the water in the canal and a flush pipe extended 
beyond the slope line on the west side of the canal, arranged with a 
valve so that the siphon can be cleaned by the flow of water due to the 
increased head. 

The pipes will follow the side slopes of the canal as nearly as pos- 
sible, and will be buried to a depth of 5 feet beneath the bottom or the 
canal. On both sides earth dams will be constructed extending 
across the valley on the east side at a height of 10 feet and on the west 
at a height of 5 feet above the bed of the stream. On the east side 
the dam will form a settling basin and will also act as a catch basin 
I in case of emergency. 

A concrete apron 25 feet long will be built in front of the intake, 
> which will also be of concrete construction. The outlet will be of 
. concrete, and a 25-foot apron will be built in front of it. The river 
bed will be paved for 75 feet. 

The following table shows the siphons to be constructed under the 
canal. (For further information see detail maps.) 



Station. 


Size of 
pipe. 


Elevation. 


Length of — 


Remarks. 


Intake. 


Outlet. 


Si- 
phon. 


East 
dam. 


West 
dam. 


39+100 

47+300 

59+350 


Inches. 
24 
42 
24 

54 

36 
36 


Feet. 
+72 
+74 
+79 

+72 
+70 
+18 


Feet. 
+69 
+70 
+76 

+69 
+67 
+15 


Feet. 

715 
2, 940 

732 

865 
710 
575 


Feet. 
1,200 
1,200 
2,500 

1,500 
1,000 
2,800 


Feet. 
750 
500 


West dam will be formed 
by new highway em- 
bankment. 
Do. 

• 


67+600 




75+ 350 

151+300 


700 
1,000 



it SUMMARY. 



Miry Run, station 39+100 $10,323.00 

Assinpink Creek, station 47+300 21, 355. 00 

» Bear Brook, station 59+350 16, 877. 20 

^ Millstone River, station 67+600 20,062.12 

t Cranbury Brook, station 75+350 12, 222. 00 

* Tennents Brook, station 151+300 22,638.00 



Total 103,477.32 



68 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON^ MASS., TO BEAUFOKT, N. C 



SLOPE PROTECTION. 



Revetment. — A stone revetment 1^ feet thick, built of 1-man stone, 
laid by hand, is to be placed on the slopes on both sides of the canal 
for the entire length of the canal section. It is to extend from — 7 
feet to +12 feet, having a slope length of 42.5 feet. At the foot is 
to be placed 2 by 12 inch sheet piling, 4 feet long. No revetment is 
to be placed on either the Delaware River section or the New York 
Bay section. The cost is estimated at $2,010,980. 



In determining the necessity for constructing an emergency lock 
and movable dam, two factors entered into the consideration. First, 
the Delaware River freshets ; second, the tidal movement in the canal. 

A glance at the table on page 58 of freshet heights at Bordentown, 
N. J., is sufficient to show that it is imperative to put in a lock to 
keep navigation open at such periods. 

Extensive studies and elaborate computations have been made 
regarding the tidal effect in the canal. 

The following tidal data were used in the computations: 



Through the courtesy of the Superintendent of the United States 
Coast and Geodetic Survey it is learned that — 

the problem of a canal connecting two rather distant tidal bodies has never been 
solved when resistance proportional to the square of the velocity is taken into account 

The application of the formulas for a long and deep canal where 
the depth is sufficient to make the frictional resistence of relatively 
small consequence gives a maximum current velocity of 3.1 miles 
per hour. The superintendent believes that the conditions in the 
proposed canal across New Jersey will more nearly approximate the 
conditions in a short canal where velocities are dependent on the 
relative tidal heights at the ends, and in that case believes that the 
maximum velocity will not exceed 1.27 miles per hour. The formula 
given on page 58, deduced from known data in certain rivers as stated 
makes the rate of propagation of a tidal wave through the cana] 
about 13.4 miles per hour, and based on this the calculations of this 
office were made. The maximum current velocity in the canal gen- 
erated by the tidal wave is computed to be 1.86 feet per second oi 
1.27 miles per hour. It is computed that there will be an excess 
tidal flow of 32,254,334 cubic feet to the north each 12 hours and thai 
the resultant movement of a particle of water in one tidal cycle wil. 
be north 5,812 feet. From the above it appears that very little, i: 
any, salt water will reach the Delaware River and that the maximun 
current velocity will not be great enough to necessitate the use of th< 



EMERGENCY LOCK AND MOVABLE DAM. 



Bordentown. 



Morgan 



High water lunitidal interval 

Low water lunitidal interval 

Mean range of tide 

West longitude in hours 

Tidal or cotidal hour for high water 

Tidal or cotidal hour for low water 

Tidal or cotidal hour mean semidiurnal wave 



4 hours 5 minutes 

11 hours 28 minutes. . . 

4.8 feet 

4.9S1 

VIII. 93 

IV. 06 

IX. 5 



7 hours 40 minutes. 

1 hour 40 minutes. 

5.1 feet. 

4.951. 

XII.36. 

VI.56. 

X1I.46. 



JNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 69 

lock and movable dam except in case of freshets in the Delaware 
River. 

The lock is to be constructed between stations 17 + 100 and 18+100. 
It is to have a usable length of 600 feet, a width of 75 feet, a lift of 
22 feet, and a depth on the miter sill of 25 feet at lowest low water. 
The tops of the walls are to be at elevation +25 and the walls are to 
be of 1:3:5 concrete. A guide wall, composed of 1:3:5 concrete 
piers, spaced 10 feet apart, connected at the top by reenforced 
concrete slabs, extends a distance of 600 feet at both ends of the lock. 
The main culvert, 15 feet in diameter, extends from the forebay to the 
tailbay through the entire length of the two walls. The water is to be 
conveyed to the lock chamber by means of branch culverts, 7 feet in 
diameter, spaced 30 feet apart, with opening sufficient to furnish a 
rise of water in the lock chamber of 5 feet per minute. The supply of 
water in the main culverts is to be controlled by 4 Stoney valves, 2 
in each wall, and that in the branch culverts by 18 cylindrical seat 
valves. Owing to the absence of rock formation at the site, the floor 
girders must be of sufficient depth and strength to contain the cul- 
verts and provide a footing for the walls. The floor slabs, which con- 
tain the branch culverts and furnish a foot for the wall, are to be of 
reenforced concrete construction. Two sets of miter gates, similar 
to those adopted on the Panama Canal, operating in opposite direc- 
tions, will be provided at the north end of the lock. At the south end 
a rolling gate, of the type used on the Ohio River, will be provided. 
A recess for a set of miter gates will be left at the south end of the lock 
in case it is found advisable to install them. The supply of water 
being ample, no intermediate gates are required. The elevation of 
the top of the gate is +22. The estimated cost of the lock complete 
is $1,488,229.10. 

In order not to increase the velocity of the water in the canal at 
the lock site, a movable dam is to be placed on the east side of the 
lock at the southern quoin section. It is to be of the rolling-gate type, 
similiar to the lock gates used on the Ohio River. The west recess 
for the closure of the gate dam will be constructed in the southern 
quoin section of the east wall of the lock. There is to be a clear water- 
way between the east lock wall and the east gate recess of 106 feet. 
The sill is to be of reenforced concrete construction and to have a 
depth on it of 25 feet at lowest low water. The east gate recess walls 
are to be of reenforced concrete construction. The gate dam will be 
operated on rollers running on a track and will be provided with 
butterfly valves, which will be kept open while it is being placed in 
position. The top of the gate dam is to be at elevation +22. 

FENCING. 

The canal will be inclosed on both sides by a fence extending from 
tidewater in the Delaware River to tidewater in New York Bay. 
The cost is estimated at $17,856. 

LIGHTING. 

The waterway will be lighted along its entire length through the 
New Jersey land section. Arc lights will be placed along the canal 
at intervals of 1,000 feet. The cost of erecting power house and 
installing the lighting system is estimated at $100,200. 



70 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

TELEPHONES. 

A telephone system 34 miles long, with 30 telephones, will be in- 
stalled for the entire length of the land section of the canal. The 
cost is estimated at $25,000. 

MECHANICAL INSTALLATION. 

The boilers, engines, generators, and motors for generating the 
power to operate the lock and bridges will be placed in the same 
power house as that erected for lighting purposes. A 1,500 horse- 
power plant will be installed. In this item is also included the trans- 
mission line to the lock and bridges, the operating machinery for the 
lock gates and movable dam, and the unwatering pumps at lock. 
The cost is estimated at $95,000. 

JETTIES. 

At the mouth of Cheesequake Creek two stone jetties will be con- 
structed, 1,050 feet long, to protect the entrance to the canal. The 
cost is estimated at $75,600. 

RIGHT OF WAY. 

By a recent joint resolution of the two houses of the New Jersey 
Legislature, the State of New Jersey pledges itself to appropriate 
$500,000 for the purchase of the necessary right of way through New 
Jersey for the intracoastal waterway, the above amount, or a por- 
tion thereof, to become available as soon as the Federal Government 
is ready to start construction. It is estimated that this amount will 
be sufficient to purchase the necessary right of way, but not sufficient 
to cover the water-power damages. 

SPOIL BANKS. 

Along the entire route of the canal are found tracts of land now 
unused on account of various conditions. In general such lands 
would be improved and made available for useful purposes by the de- 
posit on them of spoil from the canal cut. While such is the case, 
experience elsewhere has shown that owners of such lands are at 
times disposed to demand a heavy price for the use of their lands as 
deposits for spoil. Under these conditions it is deemed best to in- 
clude in the estimates a sum for the purchase of lands for spoil banks 
and for securing rights of way thereto. The estimated cost of the 
lands necessary for this purpose is $419,474.60. Later, when no 
longer needed, it is believed that these lands can be sold at an ad- 
vanced price. 

WATER-POWER DAMAGES. 

The water powers affected by the construction of the New Jersey 
section of the intracoastal waterway will be the Bordentown pumping 
station; Cropp's feed mill, Hutchinson mill pond; Physical Culture 
Publishing Co., Outcault, N. J.; De Voes Snuff Mills, at Spotswood; 
Bloomfield Licorice Mill; Greystone Wood Works; pumping station 



INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 71 

of the South River Water Co.; and the Runyon pumping station, 
which supplies South Amboy, Perth Amboy, and Old Bridge. 

(a) Bordentown pumping station. — This pumping station is located 
1,800 feet northwest of the line, and pumps the water from a well 
located near the station through a 10-foot pipe to a standpipe in Bor- 
dentown. It has a capacity of 1,000,000 gallons per 24 hours. It 
is not thought that the construction of the canal will materially affect 
the supply of water, as most of the wells are below —20. Should any 
of the wells be disturbed they can be relocated at little expense. 

(b) Cropp' 's feed mill, Hutchinson millpond. — The construction of a 
canal will go through this mill, which is a 2-story frame structure, 
80 by 50 feet. At present this mill is equipped with one 22-inch 
hydraulic turbine, developing 40 horsepower under a 16-foot head 
and has a capacity of 45 barrels of flour per day. 

It is proposed to lift this mill off its foundation and move it west 
1,500 feet, then to restore it to its original condition and substitute 
for the water power a steam auxiliary. 

At present the mill is not running, and has not run for a number of 
years, but the estimate of damages is based on its running 100 days 
out of the year and 10 hours per day. 

The property on which the mill is to be placed after it has been 
moved is owned by Mr. Cropp, the present owner of the mill. 

(c) Helmetta snuff mill, Helmetta, N. J., owned by the American 
Snuff Co. This mill is located 1,000 feet west of the canal line, on the 
east side of the Camden & Amboy Railroad, 1,000 feet northeast of 
Helmetta, and in a brick building 80 by 40 feet. It is equipped with 
one 28-inch turbine, developing 20 horsepower, under an 11-foot head. 
It runs 250 days of 10 hours each per year. It has an efficiency of 
75 per cent. This turbine is fed by two small streams, one having 
its origin just north of Helmetta, the flow of which becomes very small 
in extreme dry weather; the other stream has its origin north of 
Jamesburg, and flows through the cranberry bog, joining the first 
stream near Helmetta. This latter stream is fed by springs, and has 
a fairly uniform but small flow most of the time, and will be shut off 
as a source of supply to the turbine by the canal crossing it in several 
places. 

It is estimated that the flow of the first stream will be sufficient 
the greater part of the time to supply more than the power now being 
developed, namely, 20 horsepower under an 11-foot head. 

Inasmuch as the mill is at present equipped with steam auxiliary 
and the percentage of the time which the turbine would have to be 
shut down owing to lack of water is so small, no damages should be 
awarded the American Snuff Co., so none have been included in this 
estimate. 

(d) At Outcault Lake there is a dam which has a fall of 6.6 feet 
over which 74 cubic feet of water is passing per second. At this site 
on the right of way, but 100 feet from the slope line of the canal, is 
situated the power house for the old publishing house of the Physical 
Culture Magazine. There are two wooden buildings, 200 feet by 80 
feet and 70 feet by 40 feet, respectively. In this power house are two 
turbines, one 6 feet in diameter, developing 20 horsepower under 6.6- 
foot head , and one 5 feet in diameter, developing 25 horsepower under 
6.6-foot head. 



72 IN TRACO AST AL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The 5-foot wheel was installed in 1865 and the 6-foot wheel in 1869. 
The power house is also equipped with one 50-horsepower vertical 
fire tube boiler; one 25 horsepower and one 15 horsepower vertical 
engine; one 6 horsepower gas motor; and one 292 revolutions per min- 
ute, 75-ampere, 125-volt generator for lighting purposes. 

It is proposed to leave the buildings on the present site. 

The steam auxiliary being installed, the only damages which they 
could claim would be the amount of capital which at 4 per cent woulcl 
give the operating expenses to develop 40 horsepower, running 300 
days of 10 hours each. 

(e) De Voes Snuff Co. snuff mill, owned by American Snuff Co., 
located at Spotswood. This mill is located about 500 feet from the 
center line of the canal, and is a brick building 60 by 50 feet. 

The fall by which the power is generated is obtained by damming 
up Manalapan Brook, making an artificial pond. The canal line 
runs directly through this pond and will obliterate same. 

The mill has two 36-inch wheels operating under an 8-foot head, 
each wheel having a capacity of 25 horsepower, making a total of 50 
horsepower developed. The mill is also equipped with one 40-horse- 
power boiler, one 30-horsepower engine, and one 10-horsepower 
engine, and one 10-horsepower dynamo. 

The steam auxiliary being installed the only damages which they 
could claim would be the amount of capital which at 4 per cent 
would give the operating expenses to develop 40 horsepower, running 
300 days of 10 hours each. 

(/") Bloomfield licorice mill, 1,200 feet south of East Spotswood 
railroad station on Manalapan Brook. This mill is located about 800 
feet west of the center line of the canal, but some of the storehouses 
are inside the right of way. The mill is a wooden building, 90 by 40 
feet. There are two turbines (sizes not known) which, under a 7-foot 
head, develop 80 horsepower. 

There is no steam auxiliary installed in this mill at present. It 
will therefore be necessary to furnish them with one 80-horsepower 
boiler and one 80-horsepower engine. 

It is claimed that this mill runs night and day for 7 months in the 
year and 10 hours a day for the remaining 5 months. 

(g) Greystone woodworks, located on the Matchaponix Brook, about 
2,500 feet east of the center line of the canal. 

The Matchaponix Brook draining as it does from the east, the water 
power at this mill will not be disturbed. 

(h) Pumping station of the South River Water Co., located on the 
South River. This pumping station is about 1,000 feet west of the 
canal line, and is on the South River, from which it pumps its water. 
This river will enter the canal near Helmetta, thus obliterating the 
river at this point. This pumping station is a brick building 20 by 
20 feet. 

There is one 10-horsepower gas engine and one triplex pump 7 by 
8 inches, Gould Manufacturing Co., Seneca Falls, N. Y. 

This pumping station can be moved to a site on the Matchaponix 
Brook and the pipes carried under the canal, and thence to a point 
where they will join the old pipe, a distance of approximately 8,000 
feet. 

(i) Pumping station of Perth Amboy waterworks, located 1,000 feet 
southeast of Runyon station. This pumping station is fed by a series 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 73 



of wells connected by pipes which extend over 5,000 feet from the 

E umping station. These buildings are both brick. The canal has 
een located so that the nearest point to these wells is 1,400 feet. 
These wells are at an elevation of from — 10 feet to — 40 feet, and they 
will probably be very little affected by the construction of the canal. 

An embankment will be placed on the west side of the canal across 
the pond into which Tennent Brook enters, and the brook will be 
siphoned under the canal, thus very little affecting the storage 
capacity of the pond. 

The estimated cost for this work is included in the estimate for the 
Tennent Brook siphon. 

Summary of water-power damages. 
Total $101,800 

LOWERING OF GROUND WATER. 

The clay and sand deposits found along the line of the canal are 
irregular in shape and in pitch. It is impossible to foretell with accu- 
racy to what extent or distance the ground water may be lowered by 
the construction of the canal. In many places where the clay deposits 
are near the surface there will probably be no lowering. Due to the 
very steep slope required for ground-water flow through compact soils 
and the low rate of flow it is improbable that damage due to the lower- 
ing of the ground water will be great. 

NEW YORK BAY SECTION. 

The New York Bay channel is to be of the same size and to have 
the same cross section as the Delaware River Channel. It will run 
from station 177 + 880 (canal stationing) in a general northeasterly 
direction to deep water, following, wherever possible, the present 
channel line. The distance from the entrance to the canal to deep 
water will be about 12.1 miles. The dredging will all be Class A 
excavation and will amount to 1,955,350 cubic yards. 

WATER POWER AVAILABLE. 

At station 117 + 350 the Manalapan Brook will enter the canal. 
The elevation of the stream bed is + 25 feet. By constructing a dam 
1,500 feet long the elevation of the water can be raised to 33 feet. 
The flow of this stream will be not less than 70 cubic feet per second 
for 80 per cent of the year. With a fall of 30 feet and a flow of 70 
cubic feet per second the power developed would be 1 90 horsepower. 
It is proposed to erect the power house for lighting and operating the 
machinery equipment of the canal at this point, and to utilize all the 
water available for power purposes. The cost of this is included in 
the item for lighting. 

At station 132 + 600 the Matchaponix Brook will enter the canal. 
The elevation of the stream bed is +12 feet. By constructing a 
dam 1,950 feet long the elevation of the water can be raised to 20 feet. 
The flow of this stream will be not less than 20 cubic feet per second 
for 70 per cent of the year; the remaining 30 per cent of the year the 
stream will be dry. With a fall of 20 feet and a flow of 20 cubic feet 
per second, the power developed would be 36 horsepower, which 
would not pay for the construction of a plant. 



74 1NTRAC0ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 

MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION. 

Dredging. — It is believed that the channel depths between Phila- 
delphia and New York can be maintained by not more than two 
moderate-powered dredges. These with their auxiliary plant can be 
operated at a cost of $155,000 per year. 

Bridges. — The cost of maintenance of the bridges is estimated at 

3 per cent of the first cost of the superstructure. The cost of operating 
the bridges is difficult to estimate. Of the 21 bridges proposed, 7 
have a mean low water clearance of 31 feet, 1 of 34 feet, 2 of 64 feet r 

4 of 74 feet, 6 of 94 feet, and 1 of 110 feet. 

The following table shows various types of vessels for which draw 
spans will have to be opened: 



Type of vessels. 


Height of 
mast above 
water line. 


Tonnage. 


Draft. 


Remarks. 


Converted barges 

Passenger and freight steamer 

Seagoing tugs 


Feet. 
100-125 
80-100 
90 
50 
24 
90 
145 

160-170 


1,500-5,000 
200-3,000 


Feet. 
13-24 
10-15 
15-17 
10 
10 
22-25 


Top of mast can be lowered? 

30 to 40 feet. 
Top of mast can be lowered 

30 to 50 feet. 


Average harbor tug 

Harlem River tug 

Schooner, 3-mast 


5,000-5,500 


Schooner, 4-mast 













The cost of maintenance and operation is estimated at $73,545. 

Lock gates and movable dam. — As the gates and movable dam will 
be operated only for a few days out of the year, the cost of operation 
will be very small, and it is thought that 5 per cent of the cost of the 
steel in the lock gates and the movable dam will be ample for cost of 
maintenance and operation. Estimated cost, $17,672. 

Slopes and embankments. — It is estimated that labor at the rate of 
at least one man per mile will have to be employed in the care of 
slopes, embankments, fences, and siphons. The care of the highwaj^s 
should be assumed by the State, since they will replace existing State 
roads. The estimated annual cost of this labor is $20,000. 

Lighting and power plant. — The estimated cost of maintenance and 
operation of these two items is $16,000. 

Superintendence and police. — The estimated annual cost of this item 
is $30,000. 

Summary of maintenance costs. 



Dredging $155,000 

Bridges 73, 545 

Lock gates and movable dam 17, 672 

Slopes and embankments 20, 000 

Lighting and power plant 16, 000 

Superintendence and police 30, 000 



Total 312,217 



SPEED OF BOATS IN CANALS. 

In the Delaware River section and the New York Bay section the 
speed attained will be about 20 per cent less than that in the open sea. 

In the inland section the allowable speed of boats will vary accord- 
ing to the ratio of the sectional area of the boat to the sectional area 
of the canal. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 75 



The following table was compiled by the use of Herr Hoack's for- 
mulae V = o — a n _ ^ > which was derived from experiments made by 

him, in which V = velocity of back flow — maximum 3 feet per second. 
AQ= the cross section between the sunken surface, due to the boat's 
motion, and the normal water surface = 112 square feet in size of canal 
under consideration. 

q = the mean cross section of the boat. 

Q = the wet cross section of the canal. 

D = the velocity of the boat. 

This table shows the allowable speed for various sized boats. 
Maximum speed permitted for small boats 12 miles per hour. 



Sectional 
area of 

canal at 
mean low 
water. 


Sectional 
area of 
boat. 


Ratio. 


Allowable 
speed, 

miles per 
hour. 


Class of boats. 


Depth. 


Breadth. 


Tonnage. 


i 4,375 
14,375 
» 4,375 
»4,375 
4,375 
4,375 


154 
264 
490 
790 
864 
1, 136 


1:28.4 
1:16.6 
1:8.9 
1:5.5 
1:5 
1:3.8 


10 

10 

10 
7.8 
7.1 
5.1 


Tugs, canal boats, yachts 


8 

10.5 

15 

16 

18 

23 


20 

26.3 

34 

52 

50 

52 




do 




Freight 

do 

do 


Net. 
3,000 




4,000 





i These determinations agree closely with those made for the Panama Canal. 
* Running between Baltimore and Wilmington. 



The speed permitted in the Amsterdam Canal, which has a cross 
section of 4,000 square feet, is 5.6 miles per hour for boats having a 
net section of 880 square feet. 

Kiel Canal. — The area of the cross section is about 4,100 square 
feet. The speed permitted is 6.2 miles per hour. The chief engineer 
states that the largest ships make only 4.6 miles per hour. 

Manchester Canal. — The area of cross section is about 4,100 square 
feet. The limit of speed permitted is 6.2 miles per hour for the 
largest ships using the canal. The largest ships are towed through 
the canal. The banks are generally firm clay. Smaller boats are 
allowed greater speed up to 13 miles per hour. At these high speeds 
much damage is done to the slopes near the water line. 

Suez Canal. — The area of the cross section before enlargement was 
about 3,700 square feet. The highest speed allowed in the canal for 
large boats was 5.75 miles per hour. The soil is sand and easily 
moved, and the cost of maintenance has always been great. 

Assuming that a boat having a submerged sectional area of about 
800 square feet and a net tonnage of between 2,000 and 3,000 tons 
will be the type of boat generally using the proposed canal, the 
allowable speed for such a boat through the canal will be about 8 
miles per hour. 

WIDENING CANAL SECTION ON CURVES. 

Studies were made of the subject of increased width necessary for 
curved sections in canal construction, and suitable provisions were 
made therefor. (See Appendix C 1, p. 160.) 



76 INTKACOASTAL. WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



AVAILABLE STONE SUPPLY. 

The nearest available stone for concrete and stone revetment is at 
the Rocky Hill quarries. The stone at these quarries is a very good 
trap rock. It can be delivered to the canal line at the intersection 
of the Monmouth division of the Pennsylvania Railroad with a haul 
of about 10 miles. 

MAPS. 

A general index map on a scale of 1:150,000 and 14 sheets 1 of 
detail drawings of the route on a scale of 1:10,000 are herewith 
submitted. Tables of data concerning the survey are printed on 
the maps. 

SUMMARY OF CANAL STATISTICS. 

Distance from deep water in Delaware River to deep water in New York Bay, 75.7 
miles. 

Distance from deep water in Delaware River to Bordentown, N. J., 26 miles. 
Distance from Bordentown to Lalor Street, Trenton, N. J., 3.9 miles. 
Distance from Bordentown to Morgan, N. J., across New Jersey, 33.7 miles. 
Distance from Morgan to deep water in New York Bay, 12.1 miles. 
Distance from wharves in Philadelphia to the Battery in New York City (via canal), 
about 87 miles. 

Distance from wharves in Philadelphia to the Battery in New York City (via outside 

route), about 274 miles. 
Speed in the canal, 8 miles per hour. 

Speed in Delaware River and New York Bay for largest ships, about 20 per cent less 
than in open sea. 

Assuming that the speed of the largest boat using the canal would be about 15 miles 
per hour in the open sea, the time of transit from the wharves at Philadelphia to 
the Battery in New York City (via canal) would be about 8 hours and 40 minutes; 
between the same points (via outside route), about 20 hours, or twice as long as it 
would take via canal. 

Size of canal section: Bottom width, 125 feet; depth, 25 feet at lowest low water. 

Size of Delaware River and New York Bay section: 100 feet bottom width; depth, 25 
feet at lowest low water, and 300 feet bottom width; depth, 18 feet at lowest low 
water. 

Maximum deflection in any single intersection angle on canal section, 36 degrees, 

51 minutes, 15.3 seconds. 
Total deflection on canal section, 246 degrees, 26 minutes, 58.4 seconds. 
Resultant deflection to the east, 13 degrees, 39 minutes, 49.4 seconds. 
Number of locks, L 
Number of movable dams, 1. 
Usable length of lock, 600 feet. 
Usable width of lock, 75 feet. 
Depth on miter sill at lowest low water, 25 feet. 
Number of railroad draw spans, 3. 
Number of combination trolley and highway, 3. 
Number of highway draw spans, 15. 
Number of siphons, 6. 

Number of miles of double-track railroad construction, 7.52. 

Number of miles of single-track railroad construction, 1.9. 

Number of feet of trolley construction, 3,300. 

Number of feet of highway construction, 57,000. 

Class A excavation (below zero), 33,506,888 cubic yards. 

Class B excavation (zero to -j-15.0), 22,626,216 cubic yards. 

Class C excavation (above 4-15.0), 124,397,932 cubic yards. 

Class D excavation, 5,654,000 cubic yards. 

Length of dikes on Delaware River, 25,050 lineal feet. 

Slope protection, 821,628 cubic yards. 

Sheet piling for slope protection footing, 2,784, quantity in thousand feet B. M. 
All azimuths are reckoned from the south. 
General index map scale, 1:150,000. 
Detail maps scale, 1:10,000. 
Survey data shown on detail sheets. 



1 Not printed. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 77 

The following table gives the unit prices which were used in figuring 
this estimate: 



Article. 



Excavation: 

Class A 

Class B 

Class C 

Class D 

All concrete 

Railroad: 

Double track 

Single track 

Trolley 

Highway 

Slope protection: 

Stone 

Lumber 

Steel 

Dikes 

Railroad draw spans 

Trolley and highway draw 
spans. 

Highway draw span 

Jetty stone 



Unit. 



Cubic yard.. 

do , 

do 

do 

do , 



Miles 

....do 

....do , 

Foot 



Cubic yard.. 

B. M 

Pound 

Linear foot . . . 

Each 

....do 

....do 



Ton. 



Cost. 



SO. 10 
.15 
.20 
.20 
6. 75 

30, 000. 00 
20, 000. 00 
16, 000. 00 
.90 

2. 313 
40. 00 
.05 
13. 00 
90, 000. 00 
52,000. 00 

34, 000. 00 
1.00 



Remarks. 



Excavation from elevation 00 to bottom. 
Excavation from elevation 00 to +15. 
Excavation from elevation +15 up. 
Delaware River dredging. 
1:3:5 40 per cent voids in stone. 



All necessary items. 
Laid. 

Sheet piles driven. 

Structural and reenforcement in place. 
Delaware River. 

Superstructure and operating machinery. 
Do. 

Do. 



Detailed estimate of cost. 



Items. 



Water-power damages. 
Excavation: 

Class A 



Class B 

Class C 

Bridges, railroad. 



Bridges, trolley and 
highway. 



Bridges, highway . 



Siphons 

Railroad change. 

Do 

Lock 



Movable dam 

Power-house installa- 
tion. 

Road construction 



Slope protection. 



Lighting 

Telephone line 

Fence line 

Jetties 

Estimated cost ol spoil 
banks. 

Total estimated 
cost of New 
Jersey land sec- 
tion and New 
York Bay sec- 
tion. 



Quantity. 



5 power stations. 



33,506,888 cubic 

yards. 
22,626,216 cubic 

yards. 
124,397,932 cubic 

yards. 
3 



15. 



6. 



7.52 miles. 
1.9 miles. . 
1 



57 ,000 linear feet... 
'2,784 thousand 

b. m. 
821,628 cubic yards 



75,600 tons stone... 



Unit price. 



$0.10 per cubic 

yard. 
$0.15 per cubic 

yard. 
80.20 per cubic 

yard. 
$90,000 

$52,000 



$34,000. 



$30,000 per mile.... 
$20,000 per mile... 
Concrete, at $6.75 

per cubic yard; 

steel, $0.05 per 

pound. 



$0.90 per foot 

$40 thousand b. m. 

$2,313 per cubic 
yard. 



$1 per ton . 



Cost. 



$101,800.00 
3,350,688.80 
3, 393, 932. 40 
24,879,586.40 
672, 246. 00 
328,034.00 

1,963,959.00 



103, 477. 32 
225, 600. 00 
38, 000. 00 
1, 488, 229. 10 



100, 668. 77 
95, 000. 00 

51, 300. 00 



2.010,980. 00 

100, 200. 00 
25, 000. 00 
17,856.00 
75, 600. 00 

391, 438. 60 



39,311,796. 29 



Remarks. 



Below zero. 
Zero to +15.0. 
Above +15.0. 

Unit price for super- 
structure. 

Unit price for super- 
structure. Cost in- 
cludes 3,300 feet of 
trolley and highway 
change. 

Unit price for super- 
structure. Cost in- 
cludes highway ap- 
proaches. 

Double track. 
Single track. 



Sheet piling driven, stone 
laid. 



78 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Detailed estimate of cost — Continued. 



Items. 


Quantity. 


Unit price. 


Cost. 

im — - - 


Remarks. 


Delaware River: 

Philadelphia - Bor- 
den town. 

B ord en town- 1 ren- 
ton. 

Dikes 


4,650,000 cubic 

yards. 
1,004,000 cubic 

yards. 
25,050 linear feet... 


$0.20 per cubic 

yard. 
$0.20 per cubic 

yard. 
$13 per linear foot. . 


$930, 000. 00 

200, 800. 00 

325,650.00 
28, 036. 00 




Estimated cost of 
spoil banks. 

Total estimated 
cost of Dela- 
ware River sec- 
tion. 






1,484,486.00 







New Jersey land section and New York Bay section $39, 311, 79G. 29 

Delaware River section 1, 484, 486. 00 



40, 796, 282. 29 

Plus for engineering and contingencies 4, 203, 717. 71 



Total estimated cost of construction 45, 000, 000. 00 

Annual maintenance. 

Dredging $155, 000. 00 

Bridges 73,545.00 

Lock gates and movable dam 17, 672. 00 

Slopes and embankment 20, 000. 00 

Lighting and power plant 16, 000. 00 

Superintendence and police 30, 000. 00 



Total annual maintenance 312, 217. 00 

Total estimated cost of construction 45, 000, 000. 00 



ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS. 

The section of the proposed intracoastal waterway between 
Boston and Beaufort Inlet, which unites by a sheltered waterway 
across New Jersey the deep waters of New York Harbor with those 
of the Delaware River, will, if constructed, be an additional path for 
commerce between two of the greatest centers of population and 
manufactures of the United States, and will, in addition, unite existing 
systems of sheltered waterways to the south of Philadelphia and 
north of Beaufort Inlet with a length of 2,700 miles, to a system to 
the north of New York City, which, within an area limited on the 
east by Narragansett Bay, on the west by the Great Lakes, and on 
the north by Lake Champlain, has a length of 1,156 miles. In the 
southern system the improvement of the canals south from Norfolk 
to Beaufort Inlet and from the Delaware to the Chesapeake is now 
under consideration. The continuation of the Intracoastal Canal 
south of Beaufort Inlet will bring into connection a further length of 
16,800 miles of navigable waterway. In the northern system, the 
Great Lakes and their tributaries and the improvement of the 
Canadian canals between Lake Champlain and the St. Lawrence, 
now under serious consideration, will again add to the mileage of 
the connected waterways by 2,300 miles. To the east, even should 
the canal between Narragansett Bay and Boston be not constructed, 
the opening of the Cape Cod Canal will again extend navigation, 
with greatly diminished risks, to the entire New England coast. 

The extent of the commerce by rail and water through the vast 
areas thus connected is bewildering in its magnitude as shown by 
the tables of Appendix C 2, page 162. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 79 

The totals of these tables are as follows: 

In the following tables the various parts of the United States north 
of Beaufort, N. C, tributary to the proposed intracoastal waterway 
are denominated as sections 1, 2, 3, and 4, as follows: 

Section 1. New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. 

Section 2. Area south of section 1 as far as Beaufort, N. C. 

Section 3. Northeast of section 1 as far as Boston. 

Section 4. North and west of section 1, to Lake Champlain and to 
the Great Lakes. In lengths of navigable waterways, those of the 
-Great Lakes, of Lake Champlain, and of the St. Lawrence River are 
included in this section. 



■Sheltered waterways tributary to the Boston to Beaufort division of the intracoastal water- 
way -project. 





Navigable 

length 
in miles. 


Tonnage 
(short 
tons). 


Value of 
tonnage. 




464. 00 
2,135. 75 

382. 00 
2,998. 00 


68,831,894 
29,611,391 
19,793,839 
6, 795, 331 


$2, 434, 233, 482 
427,122, 161 
527,654,562 
303,716,241 








Total 


5, 979. 75 


125,032,455 


3,692,726,446 





Tonnage and valuation chiefly from Report of Chief of Engineers, United States Army, for 1910. 



Summary of principal cities and towns tributary to the Boston to Beaufort division of 

the intracoastal waterway project. 





Population. 


Wage 
earners. 


Number of 
manufac- 
turing 
plants. 


Capital in- 
volved in 
thousands 
of dollars. 


Cost of ma- 
terials in 
thousands 
of dollars. 


Value of 
products in 
thousands 
of dollars. 


Section i 

Section 2 

Section 3 

Section 4 

Total 


7,617,901 
1,140,548 
1,311,221 
1,355,608 


865,954 
97,304 
180, 460 
1,605,840 


31,958 
3,150 
4,681 

13,917 


2,047,092 
231,610 
374,977 
306,381 


1,472,460 
112,086 
231,608 
191,043 


2,641,917 
217,561 
430,467 
371,890 


11,425,278 


2,749,558 


53,706 


2,960,060 


2,007,197 


3,661,835 



Population from census of 1910; statistics from manufacturing census of 1904. 



It is difficult to foretell how much of this commerce would actually 
use the canal across New Jersey. Yet it is only by some estimate 
of this that a determination can be reached as to whether the gain 
to be effected to the people of the United States by the construction 
of the canal would be commensurate with its cost. In order to obtain 
information as to the necessity for a canal across New Jersey, as 
well as to the type and depth desired by the commercial interests, 
letters were sent to representative commercial bodies of the cities 
and to individual manufacturers along the proposed line. Many 
responses were received, some of which are appended, the most 
elaborate and valuable being the Report of the Committee on Traffic 
of the Proposed Intracoastal Canal Connecting New York and Dela- 
ware Bays. This committee was appointed in November, 1910, by 
the president of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association at the 
request of a citizens' committee of 60, consisting of men from New 



80 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. A copy of the 
report is herewith appended and attention to it is respectfully 
invited. (See Appendix C 3, p. 175.) 

The general opinion expressed by the commercial bodies replying 
was that a canal is a commercial necessity ; that the canal should be 
of the sea-level type if practicable, and should have a cross section 
adequate for navigation by vessels of from 2,000 to 3,000 tons capacity 
at a rate of from 6 to 10 miles per hour. 

The State of New Jersey further expressed its interest in the sub- 
ject by a resolution of its legislature (see Appendix C 4, p. 226) 
authorizing an expenditure of not to exceed $500,000 to provide the 
necessary right of way for a canal, and authorizing the governor of 
New Jersey to appoint a commission to cooperate with the authorities 
of the United States in the matter. 

The movement of commerce to-day parallel to the canal lines is 
by three thoroughly equipped railroad lines, by the outside sea route 
between New York and Philadelphia and by the Delaware and Rari- 
tan Canal, now obsolescent on account of a restricted cross section and 
other causes. 

For a canal to be necessary, it must be shown that the existing lines 
of communication are inadequate, or that they are unduly expensive 
in time or cost of transportation. 

ADEQUACY OF EXISTING LINES OF COMMUNICATION. 

The total tonnage moved annually by rail across New Jersey is 
approximately 53,901,000 tons. To move this tonnage the railroads 
are taxed practically to their full capacity. Delays at the terminals, 
at the shipping and receiving cities, are frequent, and in years of 
prosperity when the maximum movement of freight occurs, the rail- 
road service is confessedly unable to handle the traffic promptly. 
So great is the congestion that one of the lines is contemplating the 
construction of a new four-track freight line to parallel the existing 
line in New Jersey through a distance of 45 miles. 

The following rough comparison between the cost of increasing the 
transportation facilities between New York and Philadelphia by rail 
and by a sheltered waterway may be of interest: 

Double-track railroad freight line capacity 168,750 tons per day 
each way. 

Minimum headway for economic operation 75 trains per da,y each 
way. 

Speed between 16 and 20 miles per hour. 

Length of a freight train about 45 cars, each of 50 tons capacity, 
or a total of 2,250 tons. 

The first cost of 1 mile of double-track railroad of modern construc- 
tion, including bridges, through this thickly populated rolling country 
is between $75,000 and $100,000. 

The cost of 1 mile of the water route between New York and Phila : 
delphia is approximately $493,000. 

The capacity of the double-track railroad one way would be 
168,750 tons per day. With vessels of 3,000 tons capacity spaced 
5 to the mile and running at 6 miles per hour, the freight movement 
by canal one way would be 2,160,000 tons per day. At these figures 
the ratio of cost and capacity of a double-track railroad to a canal 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 81 

of the proposed type are: Cost, about 1 to 5.6; capacity, about 1 to 
12.8. 

In this connection it might be well to invite attention to the de- 
pendence of a great city on its supply lines for the necessities of its 
daily life, in food and in raw materials. Any disturbance of the 
regularity of the supply causes immediate suffering and loss. 
Examples of this may be cited in the United States at the time of 
the anthracite coal strikes. Another example was afforded by the 
conditions in Paris within the past year and in England at a more 
recent date. The more varied in character the lines of supply the less 
will be the probability of these lines being affected simultaneously 
by any one cause of disturbance, physical, commercial, or political. 

The outside water route between New York and Philadelphia has 
a capacity for traffic which, with adequate terminal arrangements, 
is practically unlimited. This route is, however, usable only by 
vessels of an expensive type of construction, fit for navigation during 
storms along a lee shore. During the winter season, especially, this 
route is dangerous. According to the reports of the United States 
Life-Saving Service, in the single decade, 1900-1909, inclusive, there 
were on our Atlantic seaboard nearly 5,500 disasters to shipping, 
involving a loss of over 2,000 human lives and a total vessel and cargo 
loss of $38,800,000. 

In actual practice, although the speed attained by railroad freight 
trains is much greater than that of water freight carriers, in the time 
required for the movement of heavy freight from the shipper to the 
consumer, the advantage lies with the water carrier. At present, 
delays of two days to a week are frequent in the delivery of goods 
transported by rail between New York, Trenton, and Philadelphia. 
By the outside route the time of passage between New York and 
i Philadelphia is from 20 to 30 hours, but delays by storm or fog of much 
; greater duration are frequent through the year. The estimated time 
of passage through an adequate canal is about 8 J hours. The risk 
jof delay by storms is nil; delays by fog would be infrequent. 

The freight rates between New York and Philadelphia via railroad, 
[via outside route, and via Delaware & Raritan Canal, are shown in 
the following table : 1 





Class of freight. 


First. 


Second. 


Third. 


Fourth. 


Fifth. 


Sixth. 


Rate via railroad per 2,000 pounds. . > 

Rate via outside route per 2,000 pounds. . . 
Rate via Delaware & Raritan Canal 1 


$4.40 
3. 70 


$3. 60 
2. 90 


S3. 00 
2.50 


$2. 40 
2. 00 


$2, 10 
1.80 
1.80 


$1.90 
1.60 
1.60 













1 The freight rate includes canal tolls. 



It is estimated that, with adequate terminal facilities, the freight 
rate through the proposed Intracoastal Waterway between New 
York and Philadelphia, in barges of 1,000 ton capacity, loaded 75 
per cent, will be 70 cents per ton, and that in barges of 2,000 ton 
capacity, loaded 60 per cent, the rate will be 60 cents per ton, and the 
time of transit between New York and Philadelphia will be approxi- 
mately 10 hours. 2 

1 P. 222, Philadelphia report For further details attention is invited to that report 

2 Appendix C 3. 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 6 



82 LNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

There are to-day 750,000 tons of freight carried annually by regular 
line steamers between New York and Philadelphia by the outside 
route and 400,000 tons by the Delaware & Raritan Canal. 

All of this tonnage would probably use the new canal. Two 
2,000-ton barges running each way daily would carry an equivalent 
tonnage. 

The cheapest freight rate between New York and Philadelphia 
by water is $1.60. Taking this rate and the estimated rate of a 2,000- 
ton barge at 60 cents per ton through the canal, there will be an 
estimated saving of $1 per ton, or $1,150,000 on 1,150,000 tons. 

There are 450,000 tons of freight shipped between Philadelphia 
and Boston and 200,000 tons between Philadelphia and Providence. 
These shipments are all made by regular lines via the outside route. 
The saving in freight by using the canal will be approximately $1 
per ton or $650,000 on 650,000 tons. 

In discussing the relative freight rates of water transportation and 
rail transportation, three separate conditions must be taken into 
consideration. The first, the relative cost of transportation of railroad 
freight delivered over private sidings and of barge freight which 
requires no cartage at the terminals. This covers a very considerable 
proportion of both rail and water shipments. For example, the 
Pennsylvania Railroad has approximately 360 sidings in Philadelphia, 
the Philadelphia & Reading 350, and the Baltimore & Ohio 100. 1 
But, on the other hand, there are many industrial wharves in Phila- 
phia at which cargoes are shipped and discharged directly. On such 
shipments the cost of shipping by barge is materially lower than by 
rail, and is estimated at from $1 to $1.20 per ton less. 

The second condition exists as between rail and barge shipments 
when both of them require cartage at the terminals. Though there 
are over 800 railroad sidings in Philadelphia, the United States 
Census Office in 1905 reported over 7,000 manufacturing establish- 
ments. Essential parts of every railroad station and water terminal 
are regular receiving and delivery platforms, warehouses, and team 
tracks for direct loading and unloading between carrier and trucks. 
There is sufficient hauling in Philadelphia to support a large public 
cartage business. There are approximately 5,000 teams regularly 
employed by public teamsters in hauling freight to and from railroad 
..stations and to and from the water front. 

The cartage charges between the business districts and the railroads 
differ in some cases from those between the business districts and the 
water front, but the average haul is nearly the same. Cartage charges, 
therefore, do not affect vitally the comparison of costs as between 
railroad and barge shipments when both require hauling at the 
terminal. The difference is chiefly between the rail and the barge 
rates, and, as shown above, the latter indicates a large saving. 

For manufacturing establishments located at a distance from water 
terminals but provided with private railroad sidings, the third con- 
dition, the cost of transportation by barge plus cartage, would abo*C 
equal the cost of all-rail transportation. From such establishments 
but little water-borne freight will be sent. 

As regards the first and second conditions, as stated above, it is 
deemed certain that with an adequate canal, having a daily line of 

T" — f ==•' 1 — — • - ■ 1 " : '. « ; . . ■ ' " ' - ' — " : • ' — 1 — " 

•Appendix C3. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 83 



barges plying between New York and Philadelphia, the freight rate 
being at least 50 per cent less than that charged by the railroads, and 
there being a certainty of their arriving at their destination on 
schedule time, a large percentage of the commodities now being 
snipped by rail under the first and second conditions would be 
diverted to water transportation. This is verified by numerous 
letters received from shippers in which they state that if the freight 
rate were reduced only 30 cents to 50 cents per ton they would ship 
the bulk of their freight by the canal, and estimate that their business 
would be increased by the construction of an adequate canal by 25 
to 100 per cent. A prominent manufacturer of the upper Hudson 
states that sufficient manufactured and agricultural products are 
shipped from his region to the vicinity of Philadelphia to support a 
daily barge line. Similar conditions doubtless exist at other points, 
but it has been impossible to obtain any fixed data. 

It seems impossible to get even an approximate estimate of the rail 
traffic from New York to Philadelphia and vice versa, originating and 
ending at these points or at the cities along the proposed canal lines, 
as the figures supplied by the railway offices appear to be fragmentary, 
showing a total out little larger than the known volume of water 
traffic between these two points. 

As stated before, the total freight traffic, including foreign, of the 
Pennsylvania and Jersey Central systems within the New Jersey dis- 
trict may be placed at 54,000,000 tons, of which certainly a large 
proportion was handled between New York and Philadelphia. 

The district affected by the canal is preeminently and increasingly 
industrial, requiring due consideration for the future in regard to the 
cheap movement of its raw material and food supply. According to 
the census of 1904 the industries in the Atlantic seaboard States used 
raw material to the amount of four and one-third billions of dollars 
and turned out a finished product valued at seven and three-quarter 
billions of dollars. Limiting the total to the territory adjacent to 
the leading ports between Bangor and Newbern, it appears that raw 
material to the amount of $1,900,000,000 was consumed and a fin- 
ished product turned out amounting to $3,400,000,000 per annum. 
Of this amount $1,472,460,000 of raw material and $2,641,917,000 
of finished products originated in the section directly tributary to 
the New York and Philadelphia Canal. Within this field lies the 
greatest and the most rapidly growing industrial district of the 
United States. Between Bangor and Newbern, according to the 
United States Geological Survey, there was a mineral production in 
1908 valued at $591,000,000 and within the territory from Maine to 
North Carolina there was, according to the census of 1904, a lumber 
production valued at $116,000,000, or, adding the seaboard and Gulf 
States south of North Carolina — all of which make northbound 
shipments — the total production was valued at $225,000,000. Within 
the same territory, from Maine to North Carolina, inclusive, the value 
of farm products, according to the Agriculture Department report, 
amounted in 1909 to $688,000,000, and this total does not include 
truck farming or dairy products, two items of rapidly increasing 
value. 

The coal mined within the same territory amounted in 1907 to 
246,138,812 tons, valued at $385,528,274, of which a large proportion 
is shipped to eastern and northern ports by rail and by sea. 



84 INTRACOASTAL, WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



From the five leading ports — namely, New York, Philadelphia, 
Baltimore, Norfolk, and Newport News — 43,411,371 tons of coal 
were shipped by water in 1910 (Appendix C 3). 

Each year shows an increase of farm and truck products inter- 
changed between the north and south Atlantic coasts. Perishable 
fruits and vegetables can be transported most economically by vessels 
suited to canal navigation and it is highly probable that the construc- 
tion of an Intracoastal Waterway would give a great impulse to this 
class of traffic. To-day the North is dependent on the south Atlantic 
coast for the greater part of its winter and spring vegetables and 
fruits. Conversely, the South depends on the North for its seed 
potatoes, apples, and other food products. 

An examination of the coastwise traffic of the United States shows 
a dimunition of available vessels more pronounced than is gen- 
erally realized, while the total tonnage of vessels on the Atlantic 
and Gulf coasts has increased, according to the census, from 
2,600,000 tons in 1889 to 4,800,000 tons in 1906. The increase has 
been in steamships, barges, and unrigged craft, operated principally 
by transportation companies, and the independent sailing tonnage 
available for all kinds of commerce has been steadily decreasing. 
The storms of every winter take their toll of vessels, cargoes, and 
lives, and the loss is not made up. The cost of ship construction and 
operation, the risk of loss on our stormy coast, and the consequent 
prohibitive rates of marine insurance have combined to drive the 
American flag from our own coasts, as well as from the high seas, and - 
the disappearance of our coastwise fleet of sailing vessels, seems as 
certain as that of the foreign fleet which half a century ago was car- 
rying our products for trade to all parts of the world. The fleet is 
being replaced, as the needs of established lines require, by steam- 
towed barges and unrigged craft of various lands. The Census 
Bureau reported in 1906 a total tonnage of unrigged craft on the ' 
Atlantic and Gulf coasts of 2,250,000 tons, exceeding steam tonnage 
by 1,250,000 tons, and sail tonnage by more than 1,000,000 tons, and 
comprising nearly 47 per cent of the total tonnage. 

The reason for this condition is shown by one company transporting 
coal between Philadelphia and New England ports. The sailing 
vessel formerly used in the service could carry not more than 1,200 
tons, and the fleet employed could deliver in 500 voyages about 
600,000 tons per year. The employment of tows of barges carrying 
from 1,600 to 3,300 tons per barge makes it possible, at a greatly 
reduced cost of operation, to deliver in 300 voyages comprising 1,150 
barge cargoes 2,500,000 tons per year. The same conditions must 
apply to all other forms of coastwise low-grade bulk-freight traffic, 
and it may be predicted that within the near future it must be made 
possible for water-borne traffic to be carried in this or a more efficient 
type of craft, or else it will cease to exist as an independent factor in 
transportation. The tendency of the changes in water-borne freight 
carriers is toward a type of craft for which a sheltered waterway 
offers the most advantageous conditions. The reduced cost of trans- 
portation, in the judgment of the board, would not greatly affect the 
shipment of those classes of commodities which yieJd an attractive 
profit to the railways. It would result rather in the development of 
new lines of traffic which would contribute greatly to the industrial 
development of the territory affected and to the feeding of its popula- 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 85 



tion, while the lower cost of many important lines of raw materials, as 
well as the decreased cost and increased radius of production of the 
food supply, would combine to stimulate and increase the output of 
finished products, which constitute the principal source of profit of 
railway operations. Furthermore, the board believes that the 
results shown along the routes of other canals, such as the Erie Canal 
and the canalized rivers of the United States and in Germany along 
the Finow Canal and the canalized Main River,' indicate a large 
development of local industry along the line of the canal itself and 
the waterways tributary thereto, and an increase in production of 
farm, garden, and dairy products, within a wide territory, and yet 
available for cheap and prompt delivery to the great and growing 
centers of population. 

Germany, France, and Belgium have constructed extensive sys- 
tems of canals connecting the important points of production, par- 
ticularly of minerals, with their seaports and important centers of 
consumption. In each of these countries, the canals that carry 
mainly coal and low-grade mineral products are the busiest ones; 
and in all these cases the railroads have profited greatly from the 
construction of the canal. A study of the recent development of the 
Rhine-Westphalia coal and iron district, its canals, railroads, and 
manufacturing plants, will plainly show this. 

It has been shown that 1,800,000 tons of freight are shipped an- 
nually by water between Philadelphia, New York, Providence, and 
Boston notwithstanding the high rate of freight and the perils of the 
outside route. It seems fair to assume that were the canal con- 
structed, this tonnage would pass through the canal and would be 
increased between these ports by 100 per cent, owing to the lower 
freight rates, the quicker transit, and the safer route. 

Furthermore, the manufactures of the New England States require 
the products of the Southern States and vice versa, and, it is estimated 
that at least 2,000,000 tons of freight, mainly coal, will use the canal 
between New England States and the Southern States. This would 
make a total estimated annual tonnage of 5,600,000 tons which would 
probably use the canal during the first few years. If we take as a 
very conservative estimate of the saving by shipping via canal against 
all other routes, 40 cents per ton, this would make a total reduction of 
the cost of transportation of $2,240,000. 

Cost of constructing the canal $45, 000, 000 

Three per cent of this amount equab 1, 350, 000 

Annual maintenance 312, 217 

Total 1,662,217 

DELAWARE RIVER-CHESAPEAKE BAY SECTION. 

Projects for connecting the Delaware River or Bay with Chesa- 
peake Bay by means of a "canal have long been under considerstion. 
As far back as 1824 work was begun on a canal joining the Delaware 
River at Delaware City with the Chesapeake through Back Creek 
and Elk River and in 1829 the water was let m for the first time. 
This canal is 36 feet wide at the bottom and 10 feet deep 13f miles 
long and contains three locks 220 feet long in the clear by 24 feet wide 
in the clear. The summit level is 16 feet above mean low water in 



86 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Delaware River. Tlie total cost has been reported as $2,250,000 
(Appendix E Senate Document^ft>r2t5 59th Cong., 2d sess.) , of which 
one-fifth was contributed by theUnited States, $100,000 bvTheState of 
Pennsylvania, $50,000 by the State of Maryland, and $25,000 by the 
State of Delaware; the remainder bv citizens of the three States. 
The Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co. reports the total cost to June, 
1910, as $3,989,365.17. See letter from company dated June 14, 1910. 
(Appendix D 1, p, 247.) 

This canal is still in operation carrying a restricted commerce 
between Philadelphia and Baltimore, including a regular daily and 
nightly passenger service. The small dimensions of the canal, the 
unstable banks which admit of low speed only, and the tolls charged 
upon all boats and their cargoes have prevented the development of 
a commerce proportionate to the commerce of the great bays con- 
nected by the canal. 

In 1871 there was held in Baltimore a national commercial conven- 
tion, and a movement toward a ship canal between Chesapeake and 
Delaware Bays was inaugurated which resulted in a request from the 
House of Representatives to the Secretary of War for information 
relative to the subject. 

In 1882 the river and harbor act directed the Secretary of War to 
cause surveys to be made and to report upon the various routes. 
Under this law a number of routes were surveyed. 

The river and harbor act of 1894 authorized the President to appoint 
a board to "examine and determine, from the surveys heretofore 
made under the direction of the War Department, the most feasible 
route for the construction of the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal." 
The report of this board is published in Executive Document number 
102, House of Representatives, Fifty- third Congress, third session. The 
route of the present Chesapeake & Delaware Canal was recommended 
for adoption. 

In 1906 a joint resolution of Congress authorized the appointment of 
a commission to appraise the works and franchises of the Chesapeake & 
Delaware Canal, with reference to the desirability of purchasing the 
said canal by the United States and of constructing over the route of 
this canal a free and open waterway, and also, so far as possible by 
means of the surveys already made under the War Department, to 
investigate the feasibility of the route known as the Sassafras route. 
The commission was directed to submit to the Secretary of War a 
report with its conclusions upon the probable cost and the commercial 
advantages and the military and naval uses of each of the said routes. 
The report of the commission is published in Senate Document No. 
215, Fifty-ninth Congress, second session, and favored the adoption 
of the route of the present Chesapeake & Delaware Canal. 

In all of these earlier investigations the principal object in view 
was to provide the city of Baltimore a direct and safe outlet to the 
ocean. Naturally, the pressure for the desired outlet has originated 
largely in Baltimore, and a satisfactory solution of the problem pre- 
sented demanded that the outlet should be as direct as possible. At 
the present time, however, an entirely new element has arisen for 
consideration, which modifies materially the requirements of the case. 
This is the development of a much broader project to provide an 
inland waterway from Boston to the southern Atlantic ports. The 
canal connecting the Chesapeake and Delaware waters has become 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 87 

merely a link in the whole chain of waterways, and its relation to a 
single port is no longer the controlling consideration; but it is proper 
and necessary to give this relation due weight in the selection of the 
route to be adopted. 

THE MOST AVAILABLE ROUTE. 

It is the duty of the board to examine all practicable routes and to 
prepare plans and estimates of the cost along the most available 
route. In making this examination, the board has availed itself of 
the information heretofore collected and compiled in the earlier 
reports of examinations, investigations, and surveys and has exam- 
ined personally all practicable routes formerly suggested as well as 
some later modifications of the same. 

The peninsula lying between the waters of Chesapeake and Dela- 
ware Bays is too well known to require description other than to 
point out those peculiar characteristics which have a bearing upon 
the present problem. It is of recent geological formation, consist- 
ing of the softer materials such as sand, clay, gravel, marl, mud, and 
loam, all of which can be excavated easily and economically by 
modern methods. 

The narrowest part of the peninsula is at its northern end where 
an arm of Chesapeake Bay penetrates to about 12 miles from the 
Delaware River. It requires but little imagination to conceive this 
river's flowing into Chesapeake Bay instead of into Delaware Bay, 
and the natural position for a connection between the river and 
Chesapeake Bay lies across the narrow isthmus. 

The width of the peninsula steadily increases toward the south 
until at the southern limit imposed by the condition embodied in the 
law that the projected waterway shall open into Delaware River or 
Bay the width is at least four times that of the narrowest part. 

The eastern or Delaware shore of that part of the peninsula under 
examination consists of marshes several miles in width, frequently 
overflowed by high tides and rising nowhere more than four feet 
above tide water. The western or Chesapeake shore is bluff and 
stands generally high above the water. It is indented deeply by 
several estuaries. On account of the height of the land at the wes- 
tern side, all practicable routes utilize the natural channels of estua- 
ries. 

Along the central part of the peninsula runs a ridge which must 
be crossed by all available routes and which is narrowest and highest 
at its northern end, at which point it is about 100 feet above tide 
water. 

The estuaries along the Chesapeake shore are in order beginning 
at the south, Nanticoke, Choptank ; Chester, Sassafras, and Elk 
Rivers. 

The Nanticoke River is conveniently situated for a line connecting 
Philadelphia and Norfolk, but it affords a very poor route from 
Baltimore to the ocean and leaves that city off the main line of the 
Intracoastal Waterway. It has no compensating advantages and is 
so markedly inferior to other available routes that it may be rejected 
without further consideration. 

Several routes running from the Choptank and Chester Rivers have 
been proposed and examined heretofore. While fairly convenient 
for a canal connecting Baltimore Harbor and the Atlantic Ocean, 



88 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



they are not suited for adoption as a part of the general scheme for a 
continuous waterway. Their general direction lies about at right 
angles to the proper course of such a waterway; they all cross the 
peninsula where its width is great; estimates of cost already made 
show that they would be expensive to construct; they all enter 
Delaware Bay on a shore where there is a considerable littoral move- 
ment of sand which would make the maintenance of a channel to 
deep water difficult and costly ; and lying well outside of the existing 
outer defenses of the Delaware, they all open to the ocean a conven- 
ient passage to the ships of enemies. In the opinion of the board, 
the last named objection alone is sufficient to demand the rejection 
of these routes. Not only are they located conveniently for the use 
of an enemy, but they are extremely difficult to defend against 
attack by land as well as by sea. Should a ship canal located on any 
of these routes fall into hostile hands, defenses at the entrance to 
Chesapeake Bay would at once become useless, the waters of Chesa- 
peake Bay would be opened to the ocean and the cities of Baltimore, 
Annapolis, and Washington would be exposed to grave danger. 

So vital do these considerations appear that it is the opinion of the 
board that no route should be adopted that does not enter Delaware 
River at a point within the protection and control of the fortifications 
already constructed. If this view be accepted, all routes entering 
Delaware River or Bay south of Reedy Point must be rejected without 
further consideration. This applies to all the Sassafras River and 
Bohemia River routes as well as to those already mentioned, for the 
most northerly route utilizing these rivers enters the Delaware River 
4 miles south of Reedy Point. 

The only route free from this defect is one substantially along the 
line of the present Chesapeake & Delaware Canal. This route has, 
therefore, been examined with especial care in order to determine 
whether it possesses any advantages or disadvantages of sufficient 
weight to control decisively its selection or rejection. 

Its principal advantages are as follows : 

Its location and general direction are well suited to its use as a part 
of the general intracoastal-waterway project. 
It crosses the peninsula at its narrowest part. 

The materials to be excavated in construction are all adapted to 
easy, rapid, and economical work. 

It intersects fewer routes of land travel than other routes available. 

It shortens the distance from Baltimore to Cape Henlopen by 184 
miles. 

It enters the Delaware River in the immediate vicinity of the pres- 
ent fortifications and well within their protection. 

Its small length of land cut, combined with its northerly position 
and the reduced number of land approaches, make it the route most 
easily defended against land attack. 

The maintenance of its channel where it enters the Delaware River 
and Chesapeake Bay presents no serious difficulty. 

The cost of a canal by this route will be less than by any other 
available. 

The construction work can be so conducted as to permit the unin- 
terrupted use, toll free, of the canal for commerce as soon as the Gov- 
ernment acquires possession. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 89 



Objections to this route have been made as follows: 

The ridge crossed by the canal is about 100 feet high at its summit, 

and is composed of strata liable to slips when the banks are saturated 

with water. 

Borings into the strata, which must be cut by the enlarged section 
for a ship canal, have been alleged to indicate the presence of quick- 
sands. 

The northerly position of this route has caused apprehension that 
ice would interfere with traffic more than upon other routes. 

These disadvantages present no insuperable obstacle to the con- 
struction of a canal on this route, and similar difficulties will probably 
be met on any route selected. The many positive advantages pos- 
sessed by the route are believed to outweigh any probable increase 
of cost due to the disadvantages alleged, and it is the opinion of the 
board that the most available route lies substantially along the line 
of the present Chesapeake & Delaware Canal. 

In this connection it is worthy of note that this line was selected 
for the present canal at a time when primitive methods were 
employed. The attack with pick and shovel on the ridge at its 
highest point proves that the engineers who directed the work were 
convinced that they had selected the line of least resistance. The 
lapse of years has not altered the physical conditions. 

The board of 1894, ordered to determine the most feasible route, 
reported: 

After examination of the surveys heretofore made under the direction of the War 
Department, this board determines the most feasible route for the construction of the 
Chesapeake & Delaware Canal to be the Back Creek route, which is substantially 
located upon the line of the existing Chesapeake & Delaware Canal. 

The commission appointed in 1906 reported in favor of the route of 
the present Chesapeake & Delaware Canal as compared with the 
Sassafras River route. 

The present board also believes that a route substantially following 
the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal is the most available, and has 
caused a survey to be made, and has prepared plans and estimates 
for a canal along that route. 

THE PLAN. 

The alignment. — The Delaware City terminus of the existing canal 
is not well adapted to enlargement. It introduces an objec- 
tionable curve in the alignment of the canal about a mile from the 
entrance, and strikes the Delaware River in a minor channel be- 
tween the Delaware shore and Pea Patch Island. To utilize this 
entrance would involve the improvement and maintenance of this 
minor channel, now about 20 feet deep, throughout its entire length; 
for if a Delaware River approach were provided around the northern 
end of the island only, vessels of considerable draft issuing from the 
canal and bound south would be forced to make a long detour, and a 
similar detour would be made by northbound traffic if an approach 
around the southern end of the island only were provided. An even 
more serious objection to the present entrance is found in its direction 
with respect to the tidal currents in the river and the probability of a 
consequent shoaling, which, for a sea-level canal, would make the 
maintenance of the channel under such conditions difficult and costly. 



90 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

These objections do not apply to a line striking the river at Reedy 
Point, as shown in the plan accompanying this report. (Sheet No. 1.) 
This line is free from curvature and traverses marshland, where exca- 
vation will be rapid and cheap, and where damages for land taken 
will be slight as compared to those for property in Delaware City. 

It is not proposed to abandon entirely the present entrance. By a 
slight deepening it can be retained for the use of light traffic bound to 
or from the north, thus relieving the main entrance from the large 
numbers of small vessels, pleasure craft, etc., that will doubtless use 
the canal, and at the same time lessening the loss to Delaware City 
that would be caused by the abandonment of the present entrance. 

The new entrance planned by the board has the additional ad- 
vantage of being well defended by the fortifications at Fort Du Pont 
and of increasing the strength of the fortifications against a land 
attack. The retention of the present canal in rear of the fortifications, 
as described above, also affords an increase of strength. 

The erection of wharves and buildings at Reedy Point would 
mask the guns of the defense, which should not be permitted. To 
obviate this difficulty, it is proposed to widen the canal from Reedy 
Point to the proposed highway bridge at Station 11 +600. Wharves, 
warehouses, and other buildings may then be erected which will be 
outside of the field of fire of the guns, and a safe port will be provided 
for vessels waiting for tugs to take them through the canal or for 
other purposes. To insure a clear field of fire for the guns of the 
defenses, it is believed to be necessary for the United States to pur- 
chase all the marshland within the field of fire. 

From the point of junction of the new entrance and the present 
canal to Chesapeake City, the proposed canal follows closely the line 
of the existing cut. At Deep Cut a study has been made of the high 
banks where in the past slips have occurred. Borings were made to 
determine the strata through which the enlarged channel will run, 
and a new line was surveyed leaving the canal at Crystal Run and 
avoiding Deep Cut entirely. Earlier investigations were thought to 
have disclosed the existence in Deep Cut of water-bearing sands, 
sometimes described as quicksands, which flowed freely into the bor- 
ing apparatus and which threatened the canal with serious slips. 

The estimates of the board show that a cut on the Crystal Run 
line would increase the cost of the canal about $1,500,000 over that 
of the Deep Cut line. In comparing the two routes, particular study 
has been given to those dangers and difficulties which exist on the 
Deep Cut line and which it had been hoped to avoid by adopting the 
other. 

The only dangers apprehended were those due to unstable material 
in the banks and to quicksands in the subsoil. 

When the present cut was made, hand methods of excavation were 
employed, and consequently the side slopes were left as steep as they 
would stand and the excavated material was deposited along the 
very edges of the cut. In the firmest material, this procedure must 
inevitably produce conditions conducive to slips in the banks. Such 
slips have been numerous in the past and some of them have been 
of considerable extent. In recent years, however, the banks appear 
to have been reasonably stable and permanent. The only move- 
ments of the material of the banks of Deep Cut have been of the 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 91 



kinds usually observed in excavations, and may be classified as 
follows : 

A. Erosion. 

B. Slips due to undercutting of the foot of the slope. 

C. Slips due to the presence of water at the upper surface of a 
stratum of clay, causing such surface to become more or less lubri- 
cated. 

D. Flowing of material due to saturation by water and consequent 
change in the angle of repose. 

The first class named above presents no unusual features, and can 
be controlled by ordinary means such as the employment of easy 
slopes, drains, and suitable grasses. 

Slips of Class B are found commonly along the south bank of the 
present canal. No towpath or berm was constructed on that side, 
and where the banks were not revetted, or where the old revetment 
has failed, the water has undercut the banks, and the cohesion of the 
soil has been insufficient to support the portion of the bank so under- 
cut. The cross section proposed for the new canal has a berm above 
the water surface along both sides of the canal, which is believed to 
be a sufficient protection against this kind of slip, and, in addition, 
revetments are contemplated wherever necessary. 

The largest slips, as well as the most numerous, are of Class C. 
There is no uniform stratification in the banks of Deep Cut, but the 
general rule seems to be a heavy layer of sandy soil at the upper 
surface resting upon a stratum of clay. Throughout the region of 
slips numerous springs appear along the banks at the dividing surface 
between the sandy soil and the supporting clay. No slips are found 
which do not show water at the foot, either the water of the canal 
cutting away the foot of the bank or springs issuing from the bank 
as just described. It is thought safe to conclude that all the slips 
that have occurred heretofore have been caused principally by water. 
Where a slip has provided a ready escape for the water percolating 
through the bank, the bank has generally ceased to slide, and in 
some places where this has occurred the bank has remained for years 
standing at a very steep slope. 

The construction of a sea-level canal with its water surface even 
as much as 16 feet lower than the present water surface can not be 
expected to lower materially the ground water in the banks, because 
of the numerous strata of impermeable clay. Much of the ground 
water is now discharging well above the surface of the water in the 
canal, and this will continue to discharge at the same level after the 
canal is lowered. 

The lowering of the water surface, however, is not expected to 
increase the danger of slips, because the new slopes will be much 
natter than most of the existing slopes and it will probably be pos- 
sible to provide safe means of escape for the percolating waters. 
Slips will probably occur from time to time, but the recent experience, 
of the present canal does not give cause for alarm. Slips great 
enough to block the present small channel have not occurred in 
recent years, and those of early days were due largely to the steep 
slopes and surcharged banks, conditions which will not obtain in the 
proposed work. 

Movements of Class D are found along the present canal where 
the soil is at times so saturated with water that it is subject to a 



92 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

gradual flowing as a thick viscous mass. At some points the pile 
revetment has been pushed out into the channel, the piles being 
sheared off at the surface of the fixed hard pan below the moving 
stratum. The most successful remedy applied so far appears to 
have been to provide an escape for the water so that the soil should 
not become saturated. Even where no remedy has been applied, 
the movement has been so slow that comparatively little dredging 
has been necessary to remove the material entering the canal. 

All of the above-described sources of instability in the banks are 
to be expected on the Crystal Run line as well as in Deep Cut, and 
therefore there appears to be no good reason for a change of route 
at increased expense. 

No conclusive evidence of the presence of quicksand at any point 
in Deep Cut has been found. Over a length of about 7,000 feet of 
the line borings have reached a deposit of white sand which was 
formerly believed to be a quicksand that would flow up several feet 
into the boring pipe. The apparatus employed in making the borings 
consisted of a casing pipe driven vertically downward by a hammer, 
and a wash pipe of much smaller diameter working within the casing 
pipe. The lower end of the wash pipe was provided with a cutting 
point, and water was pumped down through the same pipe to rise 
between the two pipes and carry to the surface the material loosened . 

The reports have stated that the sand would flow into the casing 
pipe and rise high enough to jam and lock the wash pipe, which 
could then be raised only by great force. This same sand, however, 
has proved to be very hard and compact; so much so that the 
borings could be made through it only with difficulty. It is stated 
in the reports that 12 to 14 blows of a 500-pound hammer falling 
6 feet were necessary to drive the pipe 1 inch. 

It is believed that the apparent flowing of the sand is not real. It 
is apparent that if the upward velocity of the water in the casing pipe 
does not exceed the downward velocity of the sand grains in settling 
through the same water, no sand will reach the top of the pipe. A 
cessation of the pumping will then cause the suspended sand to settle 
and jam the wash pipe. The same thing will happen to a decreasing 
degree as the velocity of the water is increased. The jamming of the 
wash pipe is, therefore, by no means conclusive as to the flowing of 
the sand as reported heretofore. Still further doubt is thrown upon 
the existence of a flowing sand by the fact that when the pump used 
in boring was replaced by a larger and more powerful one the sup- 

Eosed inflowing of the sand was no longer noted, the explanation 
eing that the sand particles were carried to the surface more rapidly 
and there were fewer held in suspension to settle back when pumping 
ceased. 

The borings on the Crystal Run line discovered a sand similar in 
appearance to that found in Deep Cut, but reported not to possess 
the property of flowing. It is significant that these borings were 
made with the larger pump. 

The sand which has caused apprehension is fine, and when uncon- 
fined and supersaturated with water is very unstable. When even 
slightly confined it becomes compact and extremely hard and firm. 
It is believed that it is in no sense a quicksand and that it will not 
flow under pressure; but doubtless it will wash away readily when its 
surface is exposed to the action of flowing water. Water percolating 



1 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 93 

through the mass of the deposit and flowing out at an unprotected 
surface will carry some of the sand with it, thus causing the mass to 
crumble. 

Where this material is not actually exposed in cutting the canal 
prism it should give no trouble. Where actually cut through, the 
sand will be somewhat unstable, especially if ground water issue 
through it with considerable force. The great compactness of this 
sand in situ is unfavorable for such a condition to exist, but if it 
should occur, erosion of the bottom of the canal might take place 
whenever the velocity of the tidal currents is sufficient to carry away 
the live sand grains. In this case the canal would gradually deepen 
at the site of the sand deposit, and when die depth had increased to 
the proper point the process could be slopped permanently by plac- 
ing a blanket of hard material on the bottom of the cut. 

The same action of the material at the side slopes of the canal 
would probably be more serious. The surface of the slopes would 
drift away until the overlying material was undercut, when this 
harder material would sink and stop the further erosion of the sand. 
As the sand is not found nearer than 16 feet to the water surface of 
the canal, no great damage is to be expected to the high banks, the 
worst that could occur being generally outside of the berm. 

It is believed that the damages arising from the presence of this 
sand will not be of sufficient importance to cause a change of route 
at an increased cost, especially as the alternative route may be 
expected to present similar difficulties. 

The cross section. — The law under which the board is organized and 
has conducted its investigations prescribes 25 feet as the maximum 
depth to be considered. This depth would permit nearly all of the 
coastwise watei-borne traffic now plying between Baltimore and ports 
of the northern Atlantic coast to use the canal advantageously, sav- 
ing time and distance and avoiding the dangers of the exposed waters 
from Cape Henlopen southward to Cape Charles. A large part of the 
foreign commerce of Baltimore with Canadian and European ports 
could also use to advantage a canal of this depth. The saving from 
this cause is estimated as not less than $200,000 annually. 

A depth of 18 feet would permit few of the vessels engaged in this 
commerce to utilize the canal. The difference in cost of a canal 25 
feet deep and one 18 feet deep is $2,400,000 if the sections are pro- 
portional, but it is believed that the minimum width regarded as 
permissible for the deeper canal could be reduced but little for the 
lesser depth, and not at all if the canal were designed with a view to 
future deepening to 25 feet. If the canal were constructed with the 
smaller section and widened later, the work would involve the loss of 
all revetments, slopes, and slope protection along one bank, and the 
excavation of material from an unfavorable position on the surface 
of the slope. The cost of enlargement would far exceed the increase 
in cost due to constructing the proper section in the first place. 

For these reasons the actual saving in first cost of an 18-foot 
canal as compared with a 25-foot canal is only about $700,000, a 
sum not sufficient to justify the sacrifice of the benefits expected 
from the greater depth. 

The minimum width to permit vessels to move at a speed of 8 to 
10 miles per hour and to pass each other with safety is taken as 125 
feet at the bottom; at all curves this width is increased. 



94 IN TRAC0 AST AL> WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



As a result of the experience on the existing canal, the side slopas 
have been designed to be nowhera steeper than 1 vertical to 2-1.2 

horizontal, with a beim not less than 10 feet wide above the high- 
water level. Provision is made for revetting the slopes wherever 
necessary to protect them against the waves of passing vessels. 

Locks. — During the year 1871 there were 16,394 passages through 
the canal, according to the reports of the canal company. With 
the growth of rail transportation the canal traffic has fallen off, so 
that for the last three years the passages through the canal have 
been about 5,000 annually. The enlargement of the canal and the 
abolishment of tolls can not fail to restore to this route a traffic which 
would demand locks so large and costly and a pumping plant (to 
supply water for the summit level) so expensive to construct and 
operate that a tide-level canal would be cheaper to construct, to 
operate, and to maintain. 

Careful consideration has been given to the possible need for a 
guard lock to prevent excessive currents in the canal due to differ- 
ences of level in the water of Chesapeake Bay and the Delaware 
River, and the conclusion has been reached that currents having 
velocities sufficient to damage the banks seriously or to interfere 
with navigation are so unlikely to occur, even during the most 
favorable conditions for their development, that the large expendi- 
ture necessary for a guard lock would not be justified. 

The plan therefore provides for a tide-level canal without locks. 

Bridges. — The following statement shows the bridges which will 
be required to carry highways and one railway across the canal. 
The bascule type of drawbridge has been adopted for all crossings, 
and the clear width of waterway through each of the bridges is 150 
feet: 



Crossing. 


Typo. 


Bridge. 


Present 
angle to 
normal. 


Length of 
track or 
road re- 
location 


Clearance 
at mean 
low water. 


Delaware City 


Highway. . 
...do 


Draw . . . 
...do 


/ 

16 55 
0) 

5 7 
16 45 
12 45 
25 00 
22 45 


Feet. 


Feel. 

12 
24 
24 
52 
66 
24 
24 


Do 


2, 184 


St. Georges 


...do 


...do 


Canal Station 


Railroad 


...do 




Buck Bridge 


Highway 


...do 




Bethel 


...do 


...do 




Chesapeake City 


...do 


...do 












1 Normal. 



The estimated cost of construction of the above bridges is $625,000 

Estimate of cost. 



Excavation. 



Delaware River channel to jetties, 600 feet wide, 1 on 10 
slope. 

Outer end jetties to highway bridge, 300 feet wide, 1 on 
2\ slope. 

Bridge to junction with old canal, 125 feet wide, 1 on 1\ 
slope. 

Junction with old canal to Deep Cut, standard section.. 

Deep Cut section, standard section ,..„...,...,.... 

Deep Cut to Back Creek, standard section 

Back Creek to Elk River. 125 feet wide, 1 on 5 slope ... . . 
Elk River to Chesapeake Bay, 250 feet wide, 1 on aslope. 



Quantity. 



482, 127 

3, 504,832 

1,765,864 

6,784,002 
15,572,826 
4,238,563 
2,700,542 
2,617,748 



Unit. 



Cubic yards 

do 

....do , 

do 

....do 

....do 

....do 

do , 



Unit 
price. 



,12 

.12 

,15 

15 
20 
15 
15 
12 



Item cost. 



$57,855.24 

420,579.84 

264,879.60 

1,017,600.30 
3, 114, 565. 20 
635,739.75 
405,081.30 
314,129.76 



INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 95 

Estimate of cost — Continued. 



Excavation. 



Quantity. 



Unit. 



Unit 
price. 



Item cost. 



Chesapeake Bay, 600 feet wide, 1 on 5 slope 

Deepening old canal entrance at Delaware City, 36 feet 

wide, 1 on 2\ slope. 
Scotts Run, 20 feet wide, 1 on 2 slope 



4, 568, 362 
406, 835 

9,294 



Cubic yards. 
do 



Total excavation 

Bridges, 6 highway, 1 railway 

Highway reconstruction 

Bank revetment 

Special revetment, Deep Cut 

Bank revetment, old branch 

Slope protection, Deep Cut 

Drainage ditches 

Pile dolphins 

Jetties, Delaware River 

Wharves 

Drops for entering streams 

Land and land damages, high land 

Same for marsh land 

Engineering and contingencies, about 10 per cent. 



42, 650, 995 



.do. 
.do. 



$0. 12 
.15 

.15 



2 

134, 000 
12, 000 
14, 300 
20, 000 
24, 900 
82 
2,550 



Miles 

Linear feet. . 

do 

do 

Cubic yards. 
do 



7,000.00 
7.00 
15. 00 
3. 00 
.25 
.20 



Linear feet . . 



25. 00 



903 
750 



Acres . 
do. 



200. 00 
100. 00 



Total 

To this should be added the cost of acquiring the hold- 
ings of the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co. (see 
next paragraph). 

Grand total 



$548, 203. 44 
61,025.00 

1, 394. 10 



6,841, 
625, 
14, 
938, 
180, 
42, 
5, 
4, 
6, 
63, 
30, 
3, 
180, 
75, 
900, 



053.53 
000. 00 
000.00 
000.00 
000.00 
900.00 
000.00 
980. 00 
000.00 
750. 00 
000.00 
000.00 
600.00 
000.00 
926. 47 



9,910,210.00 
2, 514, 289. 70 



12,424,499.70 



ACQUISITION OP PRIVATE WATERWAY. 

The route selected coincides with the line of the present Chesapeake 
& Delaware Canal, which canal should therefore be acquired by the 
United States. Since the purchase of this canal and the abolishment 
of tolls will produce at once a saving of over $163,000 annually, this 
sum being about the average paid for tolls in recent years, and will 
certainly be accompanied by a substantial increase in the traffic 
through the canal to the advantage of the commerce of several States, 
its immediate purchase is recommended. 

The commission appointed by the President of the United States 
in 1906, whose report is printed in Senate Document No. 215, Fifty- 
ninth Congress, second session, made a careful appraisal of the 
property of the canal company, giving due consideration to the cost 
of the canal and its present value based upon its earning capacity, and 
recommended that no higher price than $2,514,289.70 be paid. 

No betterments have been added since 1887. (See letter from the 
canal company dated June 14, 1910, Appendix D 1.) 

In declining to state a price for its property the company has 
reiterated its statements made to the above-named commission, and 
the status remains practically unchanged since the date of the report 
mentioned. (See letter from the canal company dated July 12, 1910, 
Appendix D 2, p. 248.) 

The board recommends that no higher price than $2,514,289.70 be 
paid for the holdings of the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co., and that 
if these holdings can not be obtained by purchase at this price, or less, 
condemnation proceedings be instituted. 

MAINTENANCE. 

Dredging for maintenance may be required continuously, or, if 
intermittently, upon extremely short notice. For this reason a suit- 
able dredge should be kept on hand at all times. The dredging is free 



96 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, ST. C. 



from rock or other very difficult material, and a single seagoing 
dredge equipped to rehandle its load should be sufficient for all ordi- 
nary purposes. In cases of emergency contractors will be available 
in Philadelphia and Baltimore. 

The care of the slopes presents a problem incapable of definite solu- 
tion, for neither the magnitude nor location of erosion or slips can 
be predicted accurately. A sufficient organization is therefore pro- 
vided for in the estimates to maintain constant inspection, repair 
minor damages, and cultivate suitable grasses and other vegetation to 
bind the slopes. 

With properly located jetties little ice need be admitted from the 
Delaware River. The ice from the Susquehanna at times blocks the 
mouth of Elk River. With the constant passage of steel steamers 
through the canal it is improbable that ice will form extensively in 
the canal itself or increase in thickness sufficiently to block the 
channel. Only the most severe winters can be expected to interfere 
seriously with the navigation of the canal, and then only for brief 

Eeriods. Un^il experience has shown a special ice- breaking plant to 
e essential, and commerce through the canal shall have developed to 
such an extent as to make short and infrequent periods of interruption 
threaten losses to commerce great enough to justify the expense, no 
provision for ice breaking need be made. 

Estimate for maintenance, including first cost of plant and annual expenditures. 



Inspection, supervision, and repair: 

Salaries of personnel 

Office, quarters, tool houses, etc 

Launch, rowboats, instruments, etc 

Repairs to banks, revetments, and jetties 

Dredging, 1 seagoing hydraulic dredge 

Lighting and power: 

Power plant 

Operating bridges 



Total. 



First cost. 



$20, 000 
5,400 



200,000 
150, 000 



375, 400 



Annual 
expenditures 
for operation 
and repair. 



It is probable that in time commerce may seek the canal to an extent 
which will demand regulation of traffic by a police force with patrol 
boats, preferably tugs for handling vessels in difficulty; but this 
item is not considered sufficiently urgent at present to require an 
estimate. 

THE COMMERCIAL NECESSITY FOR A CANAL CONNECTING CHESAPEAKE AND DELAWARE 

BAYS. 

This section is a central link in the chain of waterways proposed 
between Boston and Beaufort. Apart from any usefulness which it 
may possess for local commerce, or such interstate and foreign com- 
merce as may use it to reach the ocean, it is essential to the construc- 
tion of any intracoastal waterway connecting New York or Phila- 
delphia with the South. But without reference to this relation to 
the other sections of the system proposed, the usefulness of the canal 
may be considered first in its relation to existing waterways and their 
commerce. 



I 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON", MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 97 

During the last five years many vessels and lives have been lost 
along the coast between Cape Charles and Cape Henlopen, between 
which points there is no harbor of refuge except the inadequate one 
at Chincoteague. Among the vessels so lost were 32 engaged in the 
coastwise trade which might have used the canal, if the same had 
been available and free, and which would in that way have avoided 
the dangers which caused their loss. The value of these vessels and 
their cargoes is not known, but the aggregate tonnage was about 
22,600, and it may be assumed that there was lost with them not less 
than 12,000 tons of freight. Vessels of this class generally carry all 
that can be loaded upon them, and the above assumption is conserva- 
tive. 

Allowing 50 per cent of the cost of new vessels of the sizes reported, 
their value may be assumed as $450,000. Considering the total ton- 
nage and value of all freight reported to the board as shipped along 
the route of the canal, an average value of $4.81 per ton has been 
deduced for the general run of coastwise freight. The cargoes lost 
may then be assumed to be worth not less than $57,720, and the value 
of the canal as a preventive of marine disaster may be taken as not 
less than $100,000 per year; in addition to which must be considered 
the great reduction in insurance rates on the total volume of coast- 
wise traffic now running outside the capes but ready to change to the 
canal when possible. There are no statistics available from which 
the amount of this saving may be obtained. With the 32 vessels 
mentioned above were lost 49 lives, an average of about 10 per year. 

Vessels engaged in the coastwise trade are not required to enter 
and clear at the customhouse, for which reason the character and 
volume of this trade are not readily ascertainable. 

Letters requesting information as to their own individual shipments 
were sent to commercial organizations, boards of trade, and all ship- 
pers whose names could be secured, and in many cases large shippers 
were personally interviewed, sometimes several calls being made 
before the desired information was obtained, and in other cases 
repeated visits secured no information. No information could be 
obtained from underwriters of marine insurance 

The data obtained can be only a fraction of the total commerce, 
but the statement below is compiled from the figures received from 
shippers as to their own shipments, and may be considered authentic 
as far as it goes. Some of the heaviest shippers were among those 
who failed to furnish figures. 

According to the responses received, the following existing com- 
merce could and would use a free canal to advantage: 

Shipments from southern points. . 

Tons. 

Iron 120, 000 

Lumber 496,889 

Tomatoes 1,361 

Coal 240,000 

Chemicals 17,000 

Paints, etc 600 

Miscellaneous 231, 564 

Total 1,107,414 

In addition to the above there was reported freight amounting in 
value to $375,000, but the tonnage was not stated. 

22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 7 



98 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0, 



Shipments from northern points. 

Tons. 

Bridge iron 18, 000 

Coal 872, 518 

Tomatoes 16, 748 

Oils 600 

Granite, etc 40, 111 

Fruit 300 

Miscellaneous 481, 931 



Total 1,430,208 

In addition to the above, freight worth $195,000 was reported, 
but the tonnage was not stated. 

The total shipments reported amount to 2,537,622 tons, valued at 
$14,170,239. 

According to the reports of the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co. 
the average annual shipments through the canal for the last five 
years have been 716,644 tons, for which the tolls have averaged 
$163,151.33, or a general average of 22f cents per ton. Applying 
this general rate to the traffic reported as now existing and ready 
to use a free canal, we find that a free canal would produce a saving 
on tolls not less than $577,309 per year. In addition to the saving 
on tolls, a further saving of 21 f cents per ton on the general run oi 
freight is estimated as probable, due to the cheap transportation 
expected to develop over a free route. The saving from this cause 
would be not less than $551,933 per year. 

It should be noted that the figures given above are only partial 
and may be taken as conservative and well below the actually 
existing amount of commerce. 

Without considering the saving in insurance, the annual saving 
on known existing coastwise commerce which would use a free 
canal may be stated as not less than $1,229,242. The actual paving 
on all coastwise commerce which would use the canal, including that 
commerce now existing but not reported, would probably be 
considerably in excess of this amount. 

Another distinct value of the canal is found in its short route 
from Baltimore to the ocean, which would give to all shipping bound 
to or from European, Canadian, or northern Atlantic ports a posi- 
tive saving in time. From this city to the ocean outside the entrance 
to Delaware Bay (a point passed by all coastwise traffic to north 
Atlantic United States and Canadian ports, as well as all ocean 
traffic to Europe) the distance via Cape Charles is 320 miles. To 
the same point the distance via the proposed canal is 136 miles. 
The saving in distance is 184 miles, and in time about 16 hours for 
steamers. 

An investigation of this saving shows that the annual traffic 
between Baltimore and domestic ports which would be benefited 
in this respect by a free canal affording 25-foot navigation is as 
follows : 

Tonnage. 

1,638 steamers annually 3, 925, 236 

342 sailing vessels annually 348, 288 

342 barges annually 284, 022 

These figures probably include a part of the freight stated above 
as available for the canal, but as we are now considering saving of 
time only, and not tolls or cost of carriage, this is immaterial. 




DELAWARE AND MARYLAND 




INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 99 



The saving in time for a steamer is two-thirds of one day for 
each passage through the canal. There would thus be saved annu- 
ally 1,092 days. The average daily cost of operating the class of 
steamer which carries the bulk of the coastwise trade is about $125. 
The annual saving is thus $136,500. 

The foreign trade carried in vessels not too deep to pass through 
the canal is estimated as follows: Steamers, 480 annually; tonnage, 
1,589,938. The saving in time is therefore 320 days, and the cost of 
operating may be placed at not less than $150 per day, or the annual 
saving may be stated as $48,000. This does not include the saving 
in time for sailing vessels and barges. 

The saving in time stated above is by no means the full saving, 
for the time saved would be utilized by the vessels to perform addi- 
tional work, earning a considerable sum which can not be estimated 
accurately. 

The value of a free canal affording 25-foot navigation may then be 
stated as follows: 

Annual saving in vessels and cargoes from shipwreck $100, 000 

Annual saving in tolls 577, 809 

Annual saving in freight 551, 933 

Annual saving in time, coastwise traffic, steamers only 136, 500 

Annual saving in time, foreign trade 48, 000 

Total 1,414,242 

These figures are based upon the commerce actually found to exist 
to-day. Commerce existing, but not specifically reported to the 
board or verified by investigation, has not been included; nor has any 
attempt been made to predict what increase in commerce would 
result from the opening of a free canal for 25-foot navigation. All 
shippers who have expressed an opinion on this matter are agreed 
that there would be a large increase. 

It is unnecessary to repeat the discussion of the general principles 
governing traffic problems, which has been included in this report for 
the New Jersey section. The reasons there set forth are believed to 
justify fully a conclusion that the completion of an intracoastal 
waterway would be followed by a very great traffic through this sec- 
tion; but independent of any relation this canal may have to a through 
intracoastal waterway, its value to existing commerce is believed to 
be sufficient to justify its construction by the Government. 

The immediate annual saving in tolls alone, after paying operating 
expenses equal to the average in recent years, would exceed 4 per cent 
on the recommended purchase price of the existing canal. 

The enlargement of the existing canal can be accomplished without 
serious interference with commerce. 

Summary of canal statistics, Delaware River-Chesapeake Bay section. 

Length of land cut miles.. 13.6 

Length of dredged channel in Delaware River do .9 

Length of dredged channel in Back Creek do. ... 4. 5 

Length of dredged channel in Elk River do 8. 5 

Length of dredged channel in Chesapeake Bay do 10.0 

Distance from Baltimore to entrance to Delaware Bay via Cape 

Charles miles.. 320.0 

Distance from Baltimore to entrance to Delaware Bay via canal . . do 1 36. 

Saving in distance from Baltimore to common point do ... . 184. 



100 1NTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Saving in time from Baltimore to common point hours. . 16 

Depth of canal at lowest low water feet. . 25 

Width of canal at bottom in land section do 125 

Width of canal at bottom in Delaware River do. . . . 600 

Width of canal at bottom in Back Creek do 125 

Width of canal at bottom in Elk River do 250 

Width of canal at bottom in Chesapeake Bay do 600 

Maximum slope in canal banks above water 1-2^ 

Side slope in dredged channel, land cut 1-2^ 

Side slope on dredged channel, Delaware River 1-10 

Side slope in dredged channel, Back Creek 1-5 

Side slope in dredged channel, Elk River 1-5 

Side slope in dredged channel, Chesapeake Bay 1-5 

Number of locks None. 

Number of highway bridges 6 

Number of railway bridges 1 

Excavation cubic yards . . 42, 675, 595 

Estimated cost of construction $9, 910, 210. 00 

Estimated cost of acquiring private waterway $2, 514, 289. 70 



NORFOLK-BEAUFORT SECTION OF THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY. 



The portion of the waterway from Norfolk, Va., to Beaufort, N. C, 
may be subdivided into three parts: First, from Norfolk to Albe- 
marle Sound; second, from Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound; 
third, from Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Harbor, and these subdivi- 
sions will be discussed in the above order. 



NORFOLK TO ALBEMARLE SOUND. 



The project for an inland waterway from Norfolk to Albemarle 
Sound has been the subject of many investigations and reports. The 
existence of natural channels to within a short distance of Norfolk 
early drew attention to the feasibility of such an inland route and led 
to the beginning of the Dismal Swamp Canal in 1787 by private indi- 
viduals under a State franchise. This canal was completed some 
30 years later and gave a continuous water route from Norfolk to 
Albemarle Sound, but of limited capacity. Another route via the 
Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal was commenced in 1856, and when 
opened gave a navigable depth of 8 feet from Norfolk to Albemarle 
Sound. This new canal, being of greater capacity than the then 
Dismal Swamp Canal, attracted to itself practically all commerce 
passing from Norfolk to Albemarle Sound. The Dismal Swamp 
Canal deteriorated rapidly, and for a number of years nothing was 
done to improve it. The average annual gross income of the Albe- 
marle & Chesapeake Canal for the 14 years, 1886 to 1899, was 
approximately $81,000. In 1892 the Dismal Swamp Canal was sold 
and came into the possession of its present owners for a compara- 
tively small sum of money. This new company, called the Lake 
Drummond Canal & Water Co., improved the Dismal Swamp Canal, 
reduced the number of locks from 5 to 2, enlarged the channel, and 
opened the canal to navigation in 1899. From 1901 to 1909 the 
average annual gross income of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal 
was about $31,000, and the average annual gross income of the Lake 
Drummond (Dismal Swamp) Canal was about $72,000. 

The above statements show that private capital was attracted by 
the possibility of securing adequate returns for the expenditure neces- 
sary to construct a navigable waterway from Norfolk to Albemarle 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 101 

Sound; that the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, commenced in 
1856, and opened a few years later, practically destroyed the business 
of the then existing Dismal Swamp Canal, and that this latter canal 
when rehabilitated and opened for operation in 1899 reduced the 
average gross income of its competitor over 60 per cent. These two 
canals have been built and operated under State charters; each pros- 
pered when it was without a competitor; both have felt the effect of 
competition; neither seems to have sought from the State any redress 
when part of its business was about to be taken away by the authori- 
zation of the construction of a competitor. 

The fact that all commerce using either of the two canals from 
Norfolk to Albemarle Sound was made to pay toll to the owners of 
the canals, thereby adding to the cost of the carriage of commodities 
via these routes, early attracted attention to the desirability of a 
Government-owned free waterway which could be used by this com- 
merce. Under the provisions of several acts of Congress numerous 
surveys and examinations have been made of the inland waterway 
from Norfolk to Beaufort and of portions thereof. It is unnecessary 
to cite all the reports which have been made upon this subject, 
although it may De well to mention briefly a few of the more 
important. 

In 1875 Congress ordered a survey from the southern end of the 
Dismal Swamp Canal to the Cape Fear River. The work was as- 
signed to Mr. S. T. Abert, United States civil engineer, and his very 
able report is to be found in the Annual Report of the Chief of Engi- 
nee£sJorJ 1 876 1 page 376, et seq. This report is valuable, especially 
fWT^excellent description of the country through which such an 
inland waterway must pass. Subsequent to 1875 there were a num- 
ber of reports, but none of peculiar interest until that submitted by 
a board of engineer officers in compliance with the provisions of the 
river and harbor act of 1902, printed as House Document No. 563, 
Fifty-eighth Congress, second session. By the law the examination 
made by this board was to determine the most advantageous route 
for a waterway, with a channel depth not less than 16 feet; the law 
further directed that the report should include the probable cost of 
any existing privately owned waterway which might form a part of 
the proposed route and which it might be to the interest of the 
United States to acquire in connection therewith. This board con- 
sidered carefully numerous possible routes, and finally recommended 
one starting from a point on the southern branch of the Elizabeth 
River, near Norfolk; thence by a canal across country to the Pas- 
quotank River, N. C, at Cooper Creek; thence via this river to 
Albemarle Sound. 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, in reviewing the 
above-mentioned report, arrived at the conclusion that the cost of 
such a waterway was greater than the resulting benefits would jus- 
tify, but stated that its study of the whole question had resulted in 
the formation of an opinion that a free waterway, with a depth of 10 
to 12 feet, would benefit comrnsrce and would possess military advan- 
tages, while probably its cost would be much less than such a water- 
way with a depth of 16 feet. 

Congress subsequently ordered an examination and a report upon 
such a route with the depth, 10 to 12 feet, recommended by the Board 
of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. This work was assigned to a 



102 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

board of engineer officers, and the report thereof is printed in House 
Document No^ 84, Fifty-ninth Congress, second session. 

This report contained estimates of cost for both a 10-foot and a 12- 
foot channel, but recommended the latter depth, the route to be via 
the Elizabeth River and the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, pro- 
vided the said canal could be purchased by the United States for a 
sum no greater than $500,000; otherwise, by a canal across country 
to the Pasquotank River, substantially the Cooper Creek route men- 
tioned above. 

This board further stated that the engineering advantages of the 
alternate routes were nearly balanced, and that it recommended the 
adoption of whichever of the two routes would be the less costly to 
construct. The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors concurred 
in these recommendations for the 12-foot channel. 

By the act of March 2, 1907, Congress provided for the construction 
of one link in this waterway from Norfolk to Beaufort by appropria- 
ting money for the construction of the Adams Creek Canal with a 
channel depth of 10 feet. It is understood, however, that this canal 
has been so constructed that there will be no difficulty in the future 
in giving it a greater depth, if the necessit} 7 for so doing becomes 
apparent. 

It is worthy of special note that up to 1909 all reports upon the 
examinations and surveys of a waterway from Norfolk to Beaufort 
had, to all intents and purposes, considered this as an independent 
proposition, and in most, if not all these reports, when the subject 
of the probable commerce along this route was considered, attention 
was given mainly to such commerce as would be carried on between 
Norfolk and points in North Carolina. 

In 1909, however, Congress directed a survey for a continuous 
waterway from Boston, Mass., to Beaufort, N. C, inland where prac- 
ticable, with a maximum depth of 25 feet, and such lesser depth along 
any portion as may be found sufficient for commercial, naval, and 
military purposes. This action by Congress introduces new condi- 
tions, and makes the waterway from Norfolk to Albemarle Sound 
but one link in a continuous intracoastal route. If this section is to 
serve as part of such a through route it calls for broader and more 
comprehensive treatment, and there may be warrant for reconsidera- j 
tion of the dimensions and alinement of this waterway, which were 
deemed adequate when it was regarded as an independent and sep- 
arate project. 

Having considered carefully the part which this particular link 
of waterway may play in a continuous through route,. the board is 
of the opinion that the specific route selected for the Norfolk-Beaufort 
section of the intracoastal waterway should be such as will admit 
future deepening up to 25 feet and that the alinement shall be suited | 
to the future development of a canal of this depth, the minimum 
radius of curvature to be 2,000 feet, except where local conditions 
make this impracticable. 

Thfc Cooper Creek route having been recommended by a former 
board, but no survey having been made of this line, the board caused n 
it to be surveyed, and the estimates herein are based upon the results I f 
of this field work. 

After an examination of all available records the board came to 
the conclusion that there were but four possible and practicable | 
routes for this waterway worthy of consideration; they are designated 



INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 103 

as (1) the Dismal Swamp Canal route; (2) the Albemarle & Chesa- 
peake Canal route; (3) the Cooper Creek route; (4) the new Cooper 
Creek route. Tt may be well to state that No. 4 is merely a modi- 
fication of No. 3, and reaches Pasquotank River a few miles above 
the mouth of Cooper Creek at the head of Turners Cut, which has 
already been improved by the Government. 

Its investigations have convinced the board that the waterway 
from the Elizabeth River to Albemarle Sound should be a sea-levei canal. 
Without repeating at length the reasoning upon which this conclusion 
has been based, unless costly pumping plants be installed, there is no 
source of water supply which would be adequate for a lock canal 
with a summit level. The only possible source from which water 
could be delivered by gravity for a summit-level canal is Lake Drum- 
mond, and the amount which can be furnished by this lake is believed 
to be insufficient to provide for the traffic which would desire to use 
such a canal. In this connection attention is invited to the discus- 
sion of this matter on pages 21, 22, and 23 of House Document No. 
563, Fifty-eighth Congress, second session; as bearing upon this 
question and in line with the facts therein set forth, the latter part 
of the year 1909 was unusually dry; the total rainfall at Norfolk 
from September 1, 1909, to December 31, 1909, was only 4.42 inches, 
which was 9.76 inches below the normal precipitation for the same 
period. On November 23, 1909, an examination showed that the 
level of Lake Drummond was then about 16.2 feet above mean low 
water in the Elizabeth River; that the lake had been drawn down 
some 7 feet from its highest level, and that its surface elevation was 
then only about 3.4 feet above the normal level of the existing canal. 
Subsequent to the date last mentioned the dry weather continued, 
and it is known that the level of the lake fell still lower. An exami- 
nation was made again on August 9, 1910; the total rainfall from 
January 1 to June 30, 1910, was only 1.47 inches below the normal 
for this period, but during June and July, 1910, a total of 13.23 inches 
of rain fell, some 3.1 inches above the normal for these two months; on 
August 9, 1910, the surface elevation of the lake was approximately 
19.7 feet above mean low water in the Elizabeth River. Making 
assumptions similar to those in the public document above mentioned, 
locks only 300 feet by 60 feet, losses by seepage, leakage, absorption 
by banks, and evaporation, about 500,000 cubic feet per day, and that 
shortly after the examination on November 23, 1909, the lake could 
be drawm down only about 2 feet farther, there would remain in the 
lake for all uses and losses but about 230,000,000 cubic feet of water, 
enough to provide for only 40 lockages a day for only about 18 days. 
This is regarded as a less amount of traffic than would probably seek this 
route, and the margin is too small to warrant trusting to Lake Drum- 
mond as the sole source of water supply for a lock canal, the same 
conclusion as was reached by the former board. Furthermore, this 
board believes that, to provide for future developments, the usable 
length of any locks should be not less than 400 feet, and with locks of 
such length the consumption of lockage water would of course be 
greater. 

To guard against an interruption to traffic, due to water shortage, 
;it would therefore be necessary to install a pumping plant and to 
keep it ready for operation; as this is, of course, practicable, an esti- 
mate of the cost of a lock canal via this route is given in a table 
which will be found farther along in this report. Even if the depth 



104 IN TBACO ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

in such a canal is made but 12 feet at first, the lock walls should be 
carried down far enough to permit future deepening of the canal 
to at least 16 feet, and the building in which the pumps are placed 
should be made large enough to accommodate more pumps and more 
boilers in case the canal is enlarged; the estimates which are given 
in the table have been made accordingly. 

The estimated cost of the waterway by each of the four possible 
routes is based upon the same dimensions as those used by former 
boards, as follows: 



Bottom 
width. 



Side 
slopes. 



In excavations through dry land 

In narrow parts of rivers 

In wide portions of rivers, in bays and the entrance to them, and in Currituck Sound 
In open sounds and across bars in North River 



Feet. 
90 
125 
250 
300 



1-2J 

1-3 

1-3 



Allowance has been made for increasing these widths at bends 
and for overdepth excavation of 1 foot. The estimates of quantities 
are based upon place measurement. 

The unit prices in this report differ somewhat from those formerly 
used. They are believed to be conservative and are based upon the 
most recent experience in the localities where the work must be done. 
The estimated unit cost for land cuts where in many cases the mate- 
rial must be elevated to considerable heights and where the surface 
growth must be cleared away, is put at a higher figure than for 
simple dredging in natural waterways where the material can be 
pumped or deposited a short distance on either side of the cut and 
need be raised but little above the natural water surface. The unit 
prices for land cuts have also been varied in accordance with the 
relative depth of the cutting below the natural surface of the ground. 
The calculations of quantities of material are based upon an align- 
ment conforming to that set forth in the sixth paragraph on page 102. 
The estimates of material to be removed from the Elizabeth River 
have been revised by omitting all estimates for excavation below the 
Norfolk & Western Railway bridge, Congress having adopted a 
project for the improvement of this stream which will provide for | 
depth of 22 feet up to the said bridge. 

No. 1. — Dismal Swamp Canal route. 



Length 
of cuts 



Excava- 
tion 



Cost of 
excava- 
tion. 



Elizabeth River above Norfolk & Western R. R. bridge and Deep Creek, 
at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Dismal Swamp Canal to Turners Cut, at 15 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Turners Cut and Upper Pasquotank River to Cooper Creek, at 12 cents 
per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Lower Pasquotank River to deep water in Albemarle Sound, at 12 cents 
per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



Miles. 
4.0 
3.5 


Cubic yds. 
1,375,000 
895,000 


23.1 
23.1 


24,520,000 
19,500,000 


8.6 
8.6 


4,030,000 
2, 800,000 


21.4 
17.8 


6,300,000 
2,026,000 



$165, 000 
107, 400 

3,678,000 
2,925,000 



483,600 
336,000 



756,000 
243,120 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 105 
No. 1. — Dismal Swamp Canal route — Continued. 

RECAPITULATION. 



16-foot 
depth. 



12-foot 
depth. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Cost of excavation 

Eight of way 

Bridges 

Estimated construction cost 
Cost of acquiring canal property.. 

Total estimated cost 



36, 225, 000 
57. 1 



35,082,600 
110,000 
130, 000 



5,322,600 
1,750,000 



7,072,600 



25,221,000 
47.1 



5,611,520 
110, 000 
130,000 



3,851,520 
1,750,000 



5,601,520 



(Length of route, 67.6 miles.) 

No. 2. — Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal route. 



Length 
of cuts. 


Excava- 
tion. 


Cost of 
excava- 
tion. 


Miles. 
5.7 
5.2 


Cubic yds. 
2,100,000 
1,400, 000 


$252,000 
168,000 


8.0 
8.0 


5,200,000 
2,890,000 


728,000 
404, 600 


10.2 
10.2 


5, 300, 000 
3, 710,000 


636,000 
445,200 


17.3 
17.3 


8,000,000 
4,200,000 


960,000 
504,000 


3.4 
3.4 


1,112,000 
700, 000 


155, 680 
98,000 


11.5 
11.5 


4, 500, 000 
2,250, 000 


540,000 
270,000 


2.8 
2.8 


775,000 
350,000 


116, 250 
52,500 



Elizabeth River above Norfolk & Western R. R. bridge, at 12 cents per 
cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Virginia Cut, Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal, at 14 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Upper North Landing River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Lower North Landing River, Currituck Sound, and Coanjock Bay. at 12 
cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Carolina Cut, Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal, at 14 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

North River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

North River Bar, at 15 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



RECAPITULATION. 



16-foot 
depth. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Guard lock, if necessary , 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way 

Bridges 

Estimated construction cost 
Cost of acquiring canal property. . , 

Total estimated cost 



26,987,000 
58.9 



$125,000 
3,387,930 
36, 000 
130,000 



3,678,930 
500,000 



4,178,930 



(Length of route, 68.6 miles.) 



106 rNTRACOASTAL, WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

No. 3. — Cooper Creek route. 



Length 
of cuts. 



Excava- 
tion. 



Cost of 
excava- 
tion. 



Elizabeth River above Norfolk & Western R. R. bridge, at 12 cents per 
Ecubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

lizabeth River above Norfolk & Western R. R. bridge, to Pasquotank 
River, at 15 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Pasquotank River to deep water in Albemarle Sound, at 12 cents per cubic 
yard: 

16-foot depth , 

12-foot depth 



Miles. 
2.6 
2.3 



25.7 
25.7 



26.5 
22.3 



Cubic yds. 
600, 000 
270, 000 



27,800,000 
22,700,000 



6,300,000 
2,026,000 



$72,000 
32,400 



4,170, 000 
3,405,000 



756,000 
243,120 



RECAPITULATION. 



16-foot 
depth. 



12-foot 
depth. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 
Length of cuts (miles) — 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way 

Bridges 

Total 



34,700,000 
54.8 



$4,998,000 
198,000 
130,000 



5,326,000 



24,996,000 
50.3 



$3,680,520 
198,000 
130, 000 



4,008,520 



(Length of route, 62 miles.) 



No. 4. — New Cooper Creek route. 



Elizabeth River above Norfolk & Western R. R. bridge, at 12 cents per 
cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Elizabeth River above Norfolk & Western R. R. bridge, to Pasquotank 
River, at upper end of Turners Cut, at 15 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Turners Cut and upper Pasquotank River to Cooper Creek, at 12 cents per 
cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Lower Pasquotank River to deep water in Albemarle Sound, at 12 cents 
per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



Length 
of cuts. 


Excava- 
tion. 


Cost of 
excava- 
tion. 


Miles. 
2.6 
2.3 


Cubic yds. 

600, 000 
270, 000 


$72,000 
32,400 


21.4 
21.4 


23,350,000 
19,300, 000 


3,502,500 
2,895,000 


9.3 
9.3 


4, 030, 000 
2,800,000 


483,600 
336,000 


26.5 
22.3 


6,300,000 
2,026,000 


756,000 
243,120 



RECAPITULATION. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 
Length of cuts (miles) — 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way 

Bridges 

Total 



16-foot 
depth. 



34,280,000 
59.8 



$4,814, 100 
156,000 
130,000 



5,100,100 



12-foot 
depth. 



24,396,000 
55.3 



$3,506,520 
156, 000 
130,000 



3,792,520 



(Length of route, 64.3 miles.) 



IN TEA COASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 107 

Lock Canal via Dismal Svjarnp route. 



Excavation, Elizabeth River and Deep Creek, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

In canal proper, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

South of canal to deep water in Albemarle Sound, at 12 cents per cubic 
yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



Two locks, 400 feet by 60 feet: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Pumping plant, 16 and 12 foot f 1 pths 

Operating expenses, capitalized at 3 per cent, 16 and 12 foot depths 



Length 
of cuts. 



Miles. 
5.7 
5.2 

22.4 
22.4 



30.7 
27.1 



Excava- 
tion. 



Cubic yds. 
1,375,000 
895, 000 

10, 100, 000 
6,600,000 



10,330,000 
4,826,000 



Cost of 
excava- 
tion. 



$165,000 
107,400 

1,212,000 
792,000 



1,239,600 
579, 120 



500,000 
450, 000 
75, 000 
300, 000 



RECAPITULATION. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Cost of excavation 

Locks 

Pumping plant 

Capitalized operating expenses . 

Right of way 

Bridges 

Cost of acquiring canal property 

Total 



16-foot 
depth. 



21,805,000 
58.8 



$2,616,600 
500,000 
75,000 
300, 000 
50, 000 
70,000 
1,750,000 



5,361,600 



12-foot 
depth. 



12,321,000 
48.7 



$1,478,520 
450, 000 
75,000 
300, 000 
50,000 
70, 000 
1,750,000 



4, 173,520 



For convenience, the costs of sea-level canals by all four routes are 
tabulated below: 

Costs of sea-level canals. 



Route. 



16-foot 
depth. 



12-foot 
depth. 



Dismal Swamp Canal route 

Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route 

Cooper Creek route 

New Cooper Creek route 



$7,072,600 
4, 178, 930 
5,326,000 
5, 100, 100 



$5,601,520 
2,733,300 
4,008,520 
3,792,520 



In the estimates of the Board no sums are included for revetments 
or retaining walls on any parts of the routes considered; it is believed 
to be quite possible that no such works will be necessary, and that it 
may be found more economical to provide for the maintenance of the 
j waterway by other means; experience alone can settle this matter 
; definitely. As set forth below, the board is of the opinion that the 
actual cost of maintenance will be substantially the same, no matter 
what route may be selected, and that the incorporation in its esti- 
mates of cost of any sums for maintenance will not effect the relative 
icosts of the waterway by the different routes. 

The board has examined with care all available data and all 
reports upon the differences of elevation of the water surface in the 
Elizabeth River and in the different bodies of water to the southward 



108 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, H". C. 

with which this stream might be connected to form the inland water- 
way to Albemarle Sound. A discussion of this question will be found 
on page 23, House Document No. 563, Fifty-eighth Congress, second 
session, wherein it is stated that "the maximum difference of level 
between the water in Elizabeth River and in Currituck Sound will 
probably never exceed 11 feet, and this would be produced only by 
the most extraordinary storm conditions. Under ordinary circum- 
stances this difference would not exceed 4 feet." 

If such a difference of level as 11 feet ever did occur, the resulting 
currents would injure the canal, but this possibility is so remote that 
the board regards it as hardly necessary to consider it or to provide 
for it. 

Such lesser differences of level up to 4 feet will occur but rarely; 
they will be produced by southerly storm winds creating an unusually 
low tide in the Elizabeth River and a piling up of the water at the same 
time in Currituck Sound, or, by the reverse, a northerly storm with 
unusually high tide in the river and the blowing out of the water in 
the sound. 

Gauges have been established at the Elizabeth River terminus of 
the canal, but the period during which readings have been taken 
is short, nor are there available any recorded readings extending over 
a sufficient length of time to give reliable data as to the differences 
of water level in the river and the canal. For the brief period during 
which the gauges have been read the mean rise and fall of the tide in 
the river at the Great Bridge lock is about 3 feet, and the mean eleva- 
tion of the water surface in the canal is about 2 feet above mean low 
tide. 

The distance from the Elizabeth River, at the present Albemarle 
& Chesapeake Canal lock, to the wide part of North Landing River, 
which may be considered as the upper end of Currituck Sound, is 
about 22.6 miles; the board believes that the normal difference 
between the water levels in the Elizabeth River and the sound will 
generally be distributed along this length, and that the resulting 
currents will not be dangerous to the canal, nor will they interfere 
seriously with navigation. 

To provide for abnormal differences of level which may occur at 
times, there is included in the estimate a sum which will defray the 
cost of the construction of a tidal guard lock, if subsequent study 
makes it evident that such a lock will be needed. 

The law under which this board is acting distinctly requires a 
report upon "the probable cost of any private waterway that it may 
be to the interest of the United States to acquire in connection with 
the proposed improvement." 

The board has secured from both canal companies a statement, in 
writing, of the price which would be accepted for all of their property. ; 
Representatives of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal Co. offer to 
the Government their canal and all their canal property for $500,000; j 
representatives of the Lake Drummond Canal (Dismal Swamp Canal) 
offer their property for the sum of $1,750,000. 

Irrespective of the opinion which the board may have as to the 
fairness of the above-mentioned prices, these are the sums for which 
the properties can be obtained, and these sums must be added to! 
the construction cost of the two routes in order that they may be 
compared and that a comparison may be made between the cost of 



INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 109 

a canal by either of these routes and the cost of such a waterway by 
another route which does not involve the purchase of either of the 
canal properties. 

Relative cost of the waterway by the several routes. — For further com- 
parison, the relative cost of sea-level canals by the several routes is 
set forth in the table next below, upon a percentage basis, the cost 
of the waterway via the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route in this 
table being taken as 100. 



Route. 



1. Dismal Swamp Canal route 

2. Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route 

3. Cooper Creek route 

4. New Cooper Creek route 



ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF THE SEVERAL ROUTES. 

The Dismal Swamp Canal route will be, beyond question, the most 
costly to construct — more costly than either of the Cooper Creek 
routes, even if all the property of the canal company were ceded to 
the United States free of charge. The existing canal is not located 
along the shortest line between its termini, nor on the lowest profile. 
The material already excavated has been deposited on the immediate 
banks, and about one-half of it must be moved again on whichever 
side the enlargement be made. The cost of moving this material is 
included in the estimate. Its present cross-section is small compared 
Jwith that which would be necessary in the enlarged canal. Exten- 
sive areas along this canal have been reclaimed, and the cost of the 
right of way may be somewhat greater than the estimate. Former 
boards, for reasons stated at length in their reports, have rejected 
this route and apparently have considered it the least practicable 
of the four. 

Many of the residents and land owners on and near the line of the 
Dismal Swamp Canal have called attention to the fact that, in addi- 
tion to providing a waterway convenient of access to them, this 
canal acts as a drain, keeping down the level of the ground water on 
large tracts of reclaimed land in the Dismal Swamp; they fear that 
if the Government adopts some other route the Dismal Swamp Canal 
will be abandoned and they will suffer great damage. 

From facts which the board has been able to gather it is thought 
no such damage can occur. The elevation of the land all along the 
Dismal Swamp Canal is quite uniform, and there are few variations in 
its general character. Near the northern end of the canal large tracts 
of land are now being drained by ditches whose bottoms are at about 
sea level. Such ditches have been most efficacious, and have greatly 
improved the lands through which they have been cut. In fact, it 
has been stated to the board that if the locks of the Dismal Swamp 
Canal were removed, and if in its then condition it served no other pur- 
pose than a drainage ditch, the increased value of the lands which 
could be drained into it would more than compensate for the loss of 
the canal as a waterway. 

An argument urged m favor of the Dismal Swamp Canal route is 
that any route which does not follow the Pasquotank River will not 



16-foot 


12-foot 


depth. 


depth. 


169.2 


204.9 


100.0 


100.0 


127.4 


146.6 


122.0 


138.8 



110 I N TEA C OASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



pass directly by Elizabeth City, the largest shipping point in north- 
eastern North Carolina. 

As shown above, the cost of a 12-foot canal via the Dismal Swamp 
Canal route is $2,868,220 greater than via the Albemarle & Chesa- 
peake Canal route. At 3 per cent this sum represents an annual 
charge of $86,046.60. It becomes a queston whether the local benefit 
conferred by carrying the waterway directly past Elizabeth City is 
worth this cost. 

Elizabeth City is connected by rail with points north and south. 
Furthermore, a canal via the Albemarle & Chesapeake route does noi 
cut it off entirely from water communication; it simply makes the 
water route from Elizabeth City to northern points somewhat longer 
and less direct. The actual distance from Elizabeth City to Norfolk 
via the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route is about 36 miles longer 
than by the Dismal Swamp Canal route; but, owing to the greater 
speed that can be maintained on the former route, the appreciable 
difference in distance by the two routes may be taken safely at abou$ 
30 miles. 

The cost for water transportation of bulky freight, which will com- 
pose by far the greater portion of the shipments to and from Elizabeth 
City, can be estimated very liberally at not over 3 mills per ton-mile, 
so that the actual increased cost of such freight over the longer route 
will not be more than 9 cents per ton. Through freight rates to and 
from points south of Elizabeth City will be the same whatever be the 
route chosen, so that the only freight movement affected by the 
choice of a route will be that originating at or destined for Elizabeth 
City. 

Tolls at present charged, per ton, on the Dismal Swamp Canal, as 
taken from the printed tariff, are as follows: 

Agricultural implements f 

Canned goods (all kinds) 

Flour 

Cotton 

Coal 

Corn 

Lumber (about) 2- 

Fertilizer 

General merchandise 

From these figures it is evident that even though freight rates fro 
Elizabeth City to Norfolk via the longer Albemarle & Chespeakc 
Canal route should be increased by as much as 9 cents per ton, yet 
with a free waterway, and the elimination of the canal tolls, there 
should be effected a positive saving of from 6 to 66 cents per ton or 
the carrying charges upon the above commodities between these twc 
points. 

At the public hearing in Norfolk on the 6th of September, 1910, i 
was claimed that the selection of any route which did not pasi 
directly by Elizabeth City would deprive that community of th< 
benefit derived from the existing competition between the waterway 
and the railroad. The facts stated above seem to have been over 
looked. A free waterway via the Albemarle & Chesapeake Cana 
route should certainly be a more active and efficient competitor wit! 
the railroad than the existing toll-charging Dismal Swamp Cana 
route. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. Ill 

In other words ; a free waterway via the Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal route will improve conditions now existing at Elizabeth City, 
and this town will be much better off than at present, so far as its own 
water-borne commerce is concerned, meaning thereby commerce 
originating at or destined for this community. This can hardly be 
questioned. 

The simple fact seems to be that if the Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal route be adopted, Elizabeth City will not be a port of call for 
through commerce, and to confer such an additional benefit upon this 
city would cost the United States, even if the cheapest route passing \ 
Elizabeth City were adopted, something over $1,059,000 more than it 
will cost to construct the waterway via the Albemarle & Cheaspeake \ 
Canal route, and, furthermore, the opening of the free waterway 
would be delayed at least three years. 

So far as the other small communities lying along the Dismal 
Swamp Canal are concerned, the abandonment of this canal as a 
waterway would no doubt impose a hardship upon them, but the 
amount of commerce involved is quite small, too small to warrant 
the serious consideration of the purchase and improvement of this 
route. 

This route has heretofore been credited with possessing few, if any, 
advantages, but there is at least one fact in its favor which seems to 
have been disregarded or overlooked. If this canal be purchased 
its operation can be continued without altering the existing locks, 
while the canal prism is being enlarged, and thus a free waterway, 
limited it is true to the draft which can now be carried through the 
locks at either end, will be at once opened to commerce, relieving it 
of the burden now placed upon it by the canal tolls. It is, of course, 
apparent that practically all the commerce now using both existing 
canals would desire to pass through such a free waterway. As 
shown above, in a season of drought it might be impossible to care for 
all the traffic which would seek the canal while operated with a 
summit level, but nevertheless it may be worth while to estimate 
what the saving to shippers would be in case this canal is made part 
of a free route, even though there should be some minor interruptions, 
due to any lack of sufficient water. There is no reason to believe 
that there would be any diminution in the traffic which normally 
, uses this canal, and every reason to expect that at least 95 per cent 
, of the traffic now plying the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal would 
be diverted to this free route. 

Statements from the two canal companies show that the average 
annual gross incomes from tolls for the past few years have been, 
for the Dismal Swamp Canal, about $72,000; for the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal about $31,000, an aggregate for both of about 
$103,000, which would measure the possible annual saving to shippers 
of goods by a free route, a sum by no means inconsiderable, and 
which should be taken into account in any discussion as to the route 
to be recommended for this inland waterway. 

To dig an entirely new canal by either of the Cooper Creek routes 
would take time, probably no less than three years, which would 
multiply the annual saving to shippers by at least three, and it 
becomes at once a question whether the Government might not be 
justified in adopting a route which would be somewhat more costly 



112 INTRAC OASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

when finally completed in order to give this immediate relief to 
commerce. 

Except for the advantages pointed out above — that the canal could 
be operated while being enlarged, and thereby afford a free waterway 
at once — this route has no superiority over either of the Cooper Creek 
routes, and as its cost, when the sum which is asked for the canal 
property is added to its construction cost, will so far exceed the cost 
by either of the Cooper Creek routes, it is believed that even the 
saving to shippers during the time needed to cut a waterway by either 
of the latter routes would not warrant the recommendation of the 
Dismal Swamp line. 

The Albemarle dc Chesapeake Canal route is the longest of the four, 
being about 1 mile longer than the Dismal Swamp route ; it lies nearest 
to the ocean, and passes for a considerable distance through the open 
part of Currituck Sound. The 1902 board stated of this portion of 
the route: 

Here the excavated channel will be exposed to cross winds and currents, and, 
judging from past experience in maintaining the present channel 9 feet deep, only 
2 feet below the natural bottom, the preservation of the deep channel required for 
the new waterway will not be easy, unless its original width and cost be considerably 
increased. The canal route passes also across North River bar, another place where 
the natural depth is small and the deterioration of a dredged cut has been shown to be 
rapid. 

The 1906 board, discussing a waterway only 12 feet deep, seems to 
have considered the maintenance of such a waterway through 
Currituck Sound as a matter of no great difficulty. 

The controlling depth through this sound was originally 7 feet; 
prior to 1883 a channel had been secured 9 feet deep, 80 feet wide 
through the entire length of the upper sound, 10.5 miles, i. e., through 
the sound proper, north of Coanjock Bay. From 1883 to 1909, 26 
years, there had been expended on dredging in this sound only about 
$28,000, partly in widening the channel and partly in redredging at 
two localities, near Beacons 5 and 6 and near Long Point. During 
all this time the Annual Reports of the Chief of Engineers speak of 
this dredged channel as being in good condition, except for obstruc- 
tions due to logs, and some little shoaling, which is attributed to 
steamers grounding outside the channel and creating shoals in their 
efforts to get off, or to steamers striking the sides of the dredged 
channels. There is absolutely nothing in any of these reports to- 
indicate any considerable deterioration of this dredged channel; on 
the contrary, once dredged, it seems to have been maintained remark- 
ably easily and cheaply. 

Of course, this dredged channel was of shallow depth, and may be 
thought to furnish insufficient evidence of what would be the con- 
dition of a cut to a depth of 16 feet, or even of 12 feet, but it can be 
said, at least, that the subsequent behavior of the existing dredged 
channel through the open part of this sound affords no evidence that 
any deeper cut would deteriorate rapidly or seriously. 

There has been some deterioration of the cut across the North 
River Bar; this cut was a very narrow one, but 40 feet wide, at first 
poorly marked, and vessels frequently struck its sides, while there 
were numerous obstructions, due to sunken logs broken loose from 
passing rafts. 

The board passed through this cut on the 7th of September, 1910, 
and found in it no depth less than 9.5 feet. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 113 

One great advantage possessed by this route is the shorter length 
of land cut, with its necessarily small cross section; this land cut is 
only about 14 miles long, against something over 22 miles on the 
route with the next shortest land cut. The banks along the lp.nd cut 
on this route are but little above sea level, while on all other routes, 
for long distances, these banks would be about 20 feet above sea level. 

Much of this route lies through natural waterways of considerable 
width; here the improved channel can be made amply large, while 
the open waters on each side of it will prevent engorgement, and ves- 
sels can maintain greater speed, which will more than compensate for 
the slightly greater length of the route. These facts are especially 
important when long tows of heavy barges are considered. 

The water level through Currituck Sound is subject to considerable 
fluctuations; winds from the north and east cause depressions of the 
water surface, sometimes as much as 2 feet; against this there is 
no way to guard, except by making the waterway sufficiently deeper 
originally. Interruption to traffic from this, cause, however, will not 
be very frequent, even if no provision is made against it. 

An advantage to be gained by adopting the Albemarle & Chesa- 
peake Canal as part of the recommended route would be the same as 
that pointed out next above — the prompt relief given to existing com- 
merce by providing at once a free waterway which could be operated 
while its enlargement is in progress. 

The Cooper Creek Routes differ but little in location, and not mate- 
rially in first cost. The line which strikes*- the Pasquotank River at 
Cooper Creek avoids a considerable length of crooked river, but the 
land cut is the longer. The New Cooper Creek route, entering the 
Pasquotank River at the head of Turners Cut, has a land cut 4.3 miles 
shorter, but necessitates the use of the crooked natural river channel 
above Cooper Creek, or the straightening of this channel in many 
places. Along either of these two lines it will take some years to cut 
a canal, during which time commerce will still be burdened with canal 
tolls. On the other hand, both these lines are shorter than either the 
Dismal Swamp route or the Albemarle and Chesapeake route, and 
along them there are no existing canal rights to purchase, both de- 
cided advantages. 

The survey of the Cooper Creek line proper shows that of the total 
length of the land cut, 25.7 miles, the cutting for a canal 16 feet deep 
will be 35 feet in depth for 45 per cent of the distance, 30 feet and over 
for 79 per cent, and 25 feet and over for 89 per cent of the distance. 
The borings show that the material to be removed along the whole 
length of the cut will be almost entirely very fine sand, and it is at 
least possible that there will be difficulty in maintaining the necessary 
width and depth in such deep cuts. 

The board has already expressed its opinion that the waterway 
from the Elizabeth River to Albemarle Sound should be a sea-level 
canal, and the estimate made of the cost of a canal with a summit 
level via the Dismal Swamp Canal shows that for such a canal, 12 
feet or more in depth, this cost will be considerably greater than for 
a sea-level canal by at least one of the other routes. 

The representatives of the Dismal Swamp Canal made to the board 
a proposition to enlarge their existing canal, to provide somewhat 
larger locks than those now at the ends of the canal, and to turn over 
this remodeled canal to the United States for the sum of $2,500,000. 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 8 



114 INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Later, upon the request'of the board, it was stated that the locks of this 
remodeled canal would be 50 feet in width, 300 feet in length, with 13 
feet of water over the miter sill, the locks to be built of timber up to 
the perpetual saturation line, and from there up of granite, and the 
gates of steel; these new locks to be built alongside the old ones, 
which would be left in place. The exact dimensions of the proposed 
cross section of the enlarged canal were not given, but it was stated 
that these dimensions would be governed largely by improvements 
already made; that the surface width might be 80 to 100 feet, the 
bottom width 60 to 70 feet, with a minimum of 70 feet where sheet 
piling has not been placed; the depth would be 12 feet. It was 
further stated that this enlargement would necessitate the removal 
of approximately 2,000,000 cubic yards of material, exclusive of the 
excavation for the locks. All of the board's figures for the cost of 
locks are based upon lock chambers 400 by 60 feet in the clear, and 
no smaller dimensions are thought to be sufficient for the future 
developments of commerce; the board has also fixed 90 feet as the 
minimum bottom width admissible in this waterway; it regards any 
dimensions less than these as inadmissible. 

It is therefore apparent that the remodeled canal offered by the 
owners of the Dismal Swamp Canal is much smaller than the mini- 
mum considered necessary by the board. Even if the dimensions pro- 
posed by the canal company were acceptable, attention is especially 
invited to the fact that to this cost there must necessarily be added 
the cost of the improvement of the natural waterways at each end of 
the canal, leading on the north to the Elizabeth River and on the 
south to Albemarle Sound. This cost the board now estimates to be 
for a 12-foot depth $686,520, so that if the above-mentioned offer of 
the Lake Drummond Canal Company were accepted the total cost 
of the 12-foot waterway from the Elizabeth River to Albemarle 
Sound would be approximately $3,200,000, which is about 20 per cent 
greater than the estimated cost of a sea-level canal of the same depth 
via the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route. The estimates of the 
cost of improving the natural waterways at the ends of this route 
have been based upon the dimensions and alignment fixed by the 
board, and they have been made with care; there is no question of 
the accuracy of the estimates of quantities of material to be removed. 
Should it be alleged that the unit prices are too high, to change them 
would necessitate changing the prices used for similar work on the 
other routes, leaving the proportionate difference of cost the same. 
Furthermore, as the board believes that Lake Drummond will not 
furnish an adequate water supply, there should be added the cost of 
the installation and operation of a pumping plant and the cost of 
operating the locks, all of which add materially to the cost of the 
canal with a summit level. 

The river and harbor act of June 25, 1910, contains the following 
provisions : 

Improving inland waterway from Norfolk, Virginia, to Beaufort Inlet, North Caro- 
lina: The Secretary of War is hereby authorized to enter into negotiations for the 
purchase, as a part of said inland waterway, of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal, 
or the Dismal Swamp Canal, together with all property, rights of property, and fran- 
chises appertaining thereto; and he is further authorized, if in his judgment the price 
is reasonable and satisfactory, to make a contract for the purchase of either of said 
canals and appurtenances, subject to future ratification and appropriation by Con- 
gress: Provided, That no contract for the purchase of either of said canals shall be 



TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 115 

made unless such purchase, after full hearing of all parties in interest, is recommended 
in the survey report to be hereafter submitted in compliance with the directions of 
Congress in the river and harbor act approved March third, nineteen hundred and 
nine: Provided further, That said report shall include estimates of the total cost of the 
completion of each of said canals, including also the purchase price of each, with the 
advantages of each for commerce. 

At a meeting of the board in Norfolk, Va., on September 6, 1910, 
there was held a public hearing, which had been widely advertised, 
and at which there was a "full hearing of all parties in interest;" the 
report of this hearing accompanies this paper, marked "Appendix 
E 1." 

The estimates of the total cost of the waterway by the different 
routes include the purchase price of each canal, as fixed by the 
owners thereof. 

The discussion of the different routes herein is believed to give a 
good idea of the advantages of each of the existing canals for com- 
merce. In addition, it may be stated that, in the opinion of the 
board, in their present condition of development, the advantages for 
commerce presented by the Dismal Swamp Canal route are greater 
than those of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route, but the advan- 
tages for commerce presented by a wider and deeper waterway along 
either route will be so nearly balanced that a choice of route becomes 
largely a matter of the relative cost. 

The cost of a 12-foot canal along the Dismal Swamp route is shown 
above to be about $2,868,000 more than the cost of a waterway of the 
same depth via the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route, and the 
board is convinced that the resulting advantages for commerce would 
not be sufficiently greater to warrant any such larger expenditure of 
money. 

Should it be possible to construct a waterway along an interior 
route for approximately the same cost as along the Albemarle & Chesa- 
peake Canal route the board would be inclined to give the preference 
to the former, but the estimates of cost have been made with care, and 
it is evident that the cost of a 12-foot waterway along the cheapest of 
the interior routes will be considerably in excess of that of such a 
waterway along the Albemarle & Chesapeake line. 

It is true that the estimated costs of the waterways along these two 
last-mentioned routes approach each other somewhat more closely as 
the dimensions of the proposed waterway are increased. The board 
believes that the depth of 12 feet may be insufficient in the future, 
and that the cost of -future enlargement of the canal should be given 
due weight in deciding upon a route to be followed, but it is decidedly 
of the opinion that this depth of 12 feet will be ample for years to 
come. 

The estimated construction cost of such a 12-foot waterway by the 
cheapest of the interior routes will be some $1,059,000 more than by 
the Albemarle & Chesapeake route, and, in addition, there will be the 
annual saving to shippers of about $100,000 by opening at once a free 
waterway along this last-mentioned route; as stated above, it will take 
at least three years to construct the interior waterway, which will 
multiply the annual saving by at least three; adding, then, $300,000 
to the estimated excess construction cost gives a total of $1,359,000, 
a sum which is thought to be much in excess of the actual value of any 
superior advantages which the interior route may possess. 



116 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



As bearing upon this question there have been secured from both 
canal companies statements of their gross income from traffic, by 
months, for the five years ending December 31, 1909; these figures 
were not supplied for publication, but in the table following will be 
found an analysis of them on a percentage basis, which will give an 
idea of how the commerce through the canals fluctuates from month 
to month and from season to season. 



Dismal 
Swamp 
Canal. 



Albemarle 
& Chesa- 
peake 
Canal. 



Both 
canals. 



Average gross monthly income, 5 years 

Same for January, 5 years 

Same for February 

Same for March 

Same for April 

Same for May 

Same for June 

Same for July 

Same for August 

Same for September 

Same for October 

Same for November 

Same for December 

Same for winter months, December, January, February 

Same for spring months, March, April May 

Same for summer months, June, July, August 

Same for fall months, September October, November. . 



100 

98 
104 
118 

120 
103 
86 
80 
78 
80 
108 
119 
106 
308 
341 
244 
307 



100 
72 
64 
93 
90 
115 
136 
124 
129 
100 
96 
98 
83 
219 
298 
390 
294 



100 
89 
91 
110 
109 
107 
103 
94 
95 
88 
104 
112 
98 
278 
326 
292 
304 



An inspection of this table makes it quite evident that the traffic 
on the Dismal Swamp Canal is greater during the fall, winter, and 
spring months than during the summer months ; on the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal, the trafjlc is manifestly less during the winter 
months than during other seasons of the year. 

It does not follow as a matter of course that all of the increase of 
traffic on the Dismal Swamp Canal during fall, winter, and spring 
is due entirely to that which is diverted from the Albemarle & Chesa- 
peake Canal by dread of storms and a desire to follow the more 
sheltered route. 

Consideration must be given to the character of this commerce, 
and of the regions through which these waterways pass ; the country 
tributary to the Dismal Swamp Canal north of Elizabeth City, N. C, 
is more thickly settled, is capable of much greater agricultural 
development, and has been much more developed than that along 
the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal; according to the best informa- 
tion obtainable, probably about 50 per cent of the total traffic on 
the Dismal Swamp Canal originates at, or is destined for, Elizabeth 
City, N. C, and points between there and Norfolk, Va. In the spring 
and fall months there are considerable outward shipments of truck 
and of made crops ; during the winter there are many ingoing cargoes 
of fertilizer, and these facts account, in some measure at least, for 
the greater traffic on this canal during those seasons. 

Irrespective of weather conditions, many boatmen now prefer the 
Dismal Swamp Canal because the mail and telephone facilities are, 
at present, better than along the other waterway. 

Even if some of the existing traffic now prefers the more protected 
route in the stormy season, it must be remembered that at present 
the limited channel depth and width confine all commerce to boats 
of small size; with the greater width and depth now proposed, and 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 117 



the larger boats which will be used, there will be less danger of inter- 
ruption by storms on the more exposed waterway, and less reason 
for seeking the more sheltered route, A study of the existing traffic 
is believed to furnish no conclusive reason why the United States 
should be warranted in expending the additional sums set forth in 
the tables, which it would cost to construct a free waterway via the 
Dismal Swamp Canal route. 

At the public hearing, a representation of the American Associa- 
tion of Masters, Mates, and Pilots, presented resolutions heartily favor- 
ing the purchase and improvement of the Dismal Swamp Canal. 
These resolutions were predicated upon the preference given, at pres- 
ent, by boatmen and shippers to this route, the greater natural 
resources of the country through which it passes, and its susceptibility 
to further development, the greater number of points of supply and 
communication, its asserted greater military advantages, and upon 
the importance of Elizabeth City, N. C, as a harbor and supply point. 

While the opinions of such practical men are worthy of serious 
consideration, it must not be forgotten that these resolutions favor- 
ing the purchase of the Dismal Swamp Canal, rather than the Albe- 
marle & Chesapeake Canal, are based, in part at least, upon the 
preference now given the former route, losing sight of the fact that 
if the latter be chosen and improved, conditions will then be decidedly 
different, and that if the recommendations of the board are approved, 
the improved waterway via the Albemarle & Chesapeake route will 
be much superior to the existing one to which the Dismal Swamp 
route is now preferred. So far as the natural resources of the country 
are concerned, it is quite probable that the land owners along the 
Dismal Swamp Canal would be benefit |d if this route were chosen. 

Elizabeth City does offer certain facilities as a harbor and a point 
of supply and repair, but communications along the improved Albe- 
marle & Chesapeake Canal route will, no doubt, be greatly bettered, 
the distance is short, and its other advantages are believed to offset 
the fact that along it, at present, there are no considerable towns. 

Certain physical disadvantages which the Albemarle & Chesa- 
peake Canal route has been alleged to possess, have been carefully con- 
sidered by the board, and all of the more important of these are dis- 
cussed at some length below. 

Although the total length of this route is slightly greater than that 
of any one of the other three routes considered, yet on account of its 
greater length of open waterway, it is believed that the time of transit 
will be somewhat less between termini. 

The possible danger of interruption to traffic via the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal route by the forces of an enemy has been suggested 
as a reason why this route should not be chosen. At its nearest point 
this route is distant fully 6^ miles from the seashore, and some 8 miles 
from the 6-f athom curve in the ocean ; the seashore is an open, exposed 
beach, one where landing is difficult, except in the most favorable 
weather, off which it is improbable that any vessels can he for any 

freat length of time. The injury to traffic by this route that could 
e done by hostile vessels lying offshore is believed to be negligible ; the 
only possible interruption to traffic, in the opinion of the board, is that 
which might result from the efforts of landing parties, but such an 
expedition landing frotn a hostile fleet would probably find it difficult, 
if not impossible, to bring on shore guns of sufficient range to reach 



118 INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

the canal from any point where they could be located. Furthermore, 
considering this portion of the waterway as merely one link in a con- 
tinuous waterway from north to south, there are several other places 
where such an inland waterway must-approach much more closely to 
the seashore and be more liable to damage and interruption to traffic 
under conditions much more favorable for an enemy. Again, in the 
event of war, in order to protect our seacoast defenses from land 
attack, it is practically certain that we must keep under observation 
all of our seacoast line between important harbors, and that we must 
have available a force which could be hurried to any point and which 
would be adequate to prevent a landing party from doing any dam- 
age to this inland waterway. 

The naval authorities were asked for an opinion, based upon the 
use to be made of it by Navy vessels, as to the relative desirability of 
a waterway via the Albemarle & Chesapeake route, or by a route 
further inland; after stating that " The most probable use of the inland 
waterway between Norfolk and Albemarle Sound, as far as the Navy 
is concerned, would be the transfer of torpedo-boat destroyers, sub- 
marines, and smaller vessels, during peace and war/' the Acting Secre- 
tary of the Navy expresses the opinion that as the distances by the 
different routes are practically the same, the route further inland is 
preferred "for the military reason of being more easily defended and 
less exposed.' ' 

In the opinion of the board, the facts set forth above show con- 
clusively that the danger to be anticipated from an attack from ves- 
sels at sea, or from landing parties, upon any traffic through the 
Albemarle & Chesapeake route, is negligible. 

Should land forces of an enemy seek to inflict damage upon the 
waterway, or to interrupt traffic thereon, the much greater length 
of contracted waterway along the more inland routes renders them 
more vulnerable, and, furthermore, the character of the country 
along the Albemarle & Chesapeake route does not favor the opera- 
tions of land forces, while the country along the inland routes offers 
much better facilities for the operation, movement, and supply of 
such forces. 

It has heretofore been urged that the cost of maintaining the 
waterway through Currituck Sound might be excessive. The fallacy 
of this has been pointed out above, and a recent examination of this 
channel through Currituck Sound shows that in it there are now no 
depths less than 9 feet, although no dredging has been done for about 
four years. This matter is further discussed below. 



Cost of maintenance. 





Dismal 
Swamp 
Canal 
route. 


Albe- 
marle & 
Chesa- 
peake 
Canal 
route. 


Cooper 
Creek 
route. 


New 
Cooper 
Creek 
route. 




Miles. 
23.1 
21.2 
22.0 


Miles. 
14.0 
19.1 
28.9 


Miles. 
25.7 
5.3 
22.0 


Miles. 
21.4 
13.5 
22.0 


Length of cuts in natural waterways of relatively small width . . 
Length of cuts in natural waterways of relatively great width. . 



IN TEAC AST AL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 119 

The above table gives some of the physical characteristics of the 
several routes. While it is impossible to fix, with accuracy, the cost 
of maintaining a waterway by any of the possible routes, it may be 
practicable to reach some conclusion as to the relative cost of such 
work. With such an object in view, compare the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal and the Dismal Swamp Canal routes; the length 
of land cuts are, respectively, 14 miles and 23.1 miles, and the ver- 
tical height of the banks on the Dismal Swamp Canal line will average 
some 50 per cent greater than on the Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal line. It would seem fair to assume that the maintenance cost 
per mile for the former line would be at least one-third greater than 
for the latter; in other words, the cost of maintaining the 23.1 
miles of land cut on the Dismal Swamp Canal route would be no less 
than the cost of maintaining a cut 30.8 miles long of the character of 
the land cut on the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route. 

The cost of maintenance, per mile, in the cutting through narrow 
natural waterways will quite certainly be no greater than that for 
a land cut; adding to the Albemarle & Chesapeake land cuts the 
total length of cutting in such waterways, 19.1 miles, gives an aggre- 
gate of 33.1 miles, and it is a very safe assumption that the total 
cost of maintenance for these parts of the Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal route will be no greater than that on the Dismal Swamp Canal 
line land cut, plus that for the 5.3 miles in the Elizabeth River. 

The remainder of the cutting on this latter line, 30.2 miles, is 
made up of 8.2 miles in the narrowest part of the Pasquotank River, 
6.5 miles in the wider part of this river, and 15.5 miles in its broad 
estuary below Cobbs Point. The remaining 28.9 miles on the Albe- 
marle & Chesapeake Canal line is made up of 4.5 miles in lower 
North Landing River, 10.1 miles through Currituck Sound, 11.5 
miles in North River, and thence 2.8 miles across North River Bar. 
North Landing. River, 4.5 miles, and North River, 11.5 miles, 
aggregate 16 miles, and the cost of maintenance for these portions of 
the route should not differ materially from that for the 8.2 miles in 
the narrow part of the Pasquotank, plus the 6.5 miles in the same 
stream between Cooper Creek and Cobbs Point. 

This leaves the 10.1 miles in Currituck Sound, and the 2.8 miles 
across North River Bar on the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal 
route, and the 15.5 miles in the estuary of the Pasquotank on the Dis- 
mal Swamp route. In the latter body of water, the natural depth 
is from 10 to 12 feet; in Currituck Sound it is but 7 feet, and through 
North River Bar there has been some trouble in keeping a very nar- 
row channel open ; the exposure in Currituck Sound is also somewhat 
greater. It may be admitted that, mile for mile, maintenance of the 
channel through the sound and across the bar will necessitate the 
annual removal of somewhat greater quantities of material than in 
the estuary of the Pasquotank, but there is a length of cut in the 
latter of 15.5 miles, against 12.9 miles through Currituck Sound and 
across North River Bar. 

Moreover, any such work of maintenance will be done best by a 
Government owned plant; the first cost of such a plant will not 
differ materially for whichever route it is built; this plant, in all 
probability, will have to be kept in commission continuously, and if 
so, the extra cost, if any, of maintaining the waterway via the 
Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal route, from the above, will be 



120 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, W. C. 



measured by the greater consumption of fuel and greater wear and 
tear, due to the removal of somewhat larger quantities of material 
from the Currituck Sound and North River Bar portions of the 
Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal route, a sum which can not be very 
large at the worst, and its expenditure might well be warranted if 
this route possesses other compensating advantages. 

For the above reasons, the board is of the opinion that the relative 
cost of maintenance is not a deciding factor in the choice of the 
particular route for this portion of the waterway, since it will be 
practically the same for all the possible routes. 

It has been claimed that vessels navigating Currituck Sound might 
find difficulty on account of the storms which they would encounter. 
This objection may be of some weight when the existing narrow 
channel is considered, but the board's estimate is based upon a 
bottom width of 250 feet, with comparatively flat side slopes, and, 
furthermore, it is expected that the excavated material will be 
placed on the eastward side of this channel, and it is thought that no 
traffic which seeks this route will be endangered or even greatly 
incommoded by storms which will be encountered. Again, the total 
length of the channel in Currituck Sound proper, where the sound 
widens out and where its width is considerable, is only about 6 or 7 
miles, while the depth of the water outside the improved channel 
will be only about 6 or 7 feet, and storm waves in water so shallow 
can do little damage to such shipping as will use this route. Fur- 
thermore, as noted above, it is intended to deposit the excavated 
material in a dike some 300 to 600 feet from the eastern side of the 
channel, and the amount of this material will be sufficient to bring 
the top of this dike to the water surface, making it an efficient barrier 
to waves from this, the most exposed, side. 

The board has recognized the fact that at times the water surface 
in Currituck Sound is depressed by the action of the -winds, and that 
this depression may, at times, for short periods, be as much as 2 
feet or even a little more. Even if no provision were made to com- 
pensate for these occasional depressions of the water surface, the 
board believes that the interruption to traffic which would seek this- 
route would be inconsiderable, but to guard against even such infre- 
quent interruptions, it is a simple matter to increase the depth of 
excavation to the needed degree, and this, if done, will not add very 
considerably to the total cost of the waterway by this route. 

After very careful consideration of all the advantages and dis- 
advantages of all the different routes for this section of the water- 
way, the board recommends that the Albemarle and Chesapeake 
Canal route be selected and improved by the United States : Provided, 
That all the property and rights of the Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal Co. can be acquired for not exceeding $500,000. The board 
believes this price to be reasonable, and that it will be to the interest 
of the United States to acquire this private waterway. 

Attention is especially invited to the fact that if the above recom- 
mendation of the board be approved, and if the Albemarle and 
Chesapeake Canal be purchased by the United States, the business 
of the now competing Dismal Swamp Canal will probably be prac- 
tically ruined. While it is understood that for such indirect damage 
done to the canal company it has no legal redress, it is thought proper 
to invite the attention of Congress to the condition which will then 
exist. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 121 

The board has recommended that the depth in this section of the 
waterway be fixed, for the present, at 12 feet, for the following reasons : 

First. This depth is at least as great as that available at present at 
all the North Carolina shipping points to and from which practically 
all the local commerce will be carried. 

Second. This depth is greater than that now available in the exist- 
ing inland waterways south of Norfolk, and will be more than suffi- 
cient for such traffic as now passes through them. 

Third. This depth will be sufficient for boats and barges much 
larger than those now in use, and large enough to permit the eco- 
nomical handling and transportation of cargoes of the class which 
will probably be carried on this waterway. 

Fourth. This depth will be sufficient for the smaller vessels of the 
Navy, torpedo boats, destroyers, and the like, and for many sound, 
bay, and river steamers which might be used to transport troops 
and supplies in time of war. 

Fifth. If constructed to this depth along the line recommended, 
this waterway can be deepened readily and economically, if, in future, 
the needs of commerce justify such an enlargement. 

The second division of the proposed intracoastal waterway from 
Norfolk to Beaufort comprises that portion of the waterway which 
unites Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds. For this particular link, there 
are a number of possible routes; one passes through the natural water- 
way of Croatan Sound; all others, after crossing Albemarle Sound, 
follow up the Alligator River, and then by land cuts of varying lengths, 
debouch into Pamlico Sound at different points from near Long Shoal 
on the east, to the mouth of Pungo River on the west. Each of these 
alternative routes has been given the name of the locality or water- 
way where it enters Pamlico Sound; five such possible routes have 
been considered in previous reports, and they are known as the Long 
Shoal, Far Creek, Juniper Bay, Rose Bay, and Pungo River routes; 
m this report an additional route, called the Modified Pungo River 
route, is also considered. 

The survey ordered by the board of the Rose Bay route has been 
completed; using the data secured, it is now possible to submit an 
accurate estimate of the quantities of material which it will be neces- 
sary to remove along the line surveyed. 

In making up these estimates, there have been used the same cross- 
sections of the waterway as for the Norfolk-Albemarle Sound link, 
and the same as adopted by former boards. 

Croatan Sound route. 





Length 
of cut. 


Excava- 
tion. 


Cost of ex- 
cavation. 


Croatan Sound, at 20 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 


Miles. 
41.0 
7.5 

2.0 
.9 


Cubic yds. 
11,500,000 
850, 000 

600,000 
111,000 


$2,300,000 
170, 000 

72,000 
13, 320 


12-foot depth 


Bluff Shoal, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 


12-foot depth 




RECAPITULATION. 




16-foot 
depth. 


12-foot 
depth. 


Excavation (cubic yards) 


12, 100,000 
43.0 
$2,372,000 


961, 000 
8.4 
$183, 320 


Length of cuts (miles) 


Estimated cost 





(Length of route, 86.4 miles.) 



122 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 

Long Shoal route. 



Alligator River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

In swamp, at 14 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Long Shoal Bay, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Bluff Shoal, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



Length 
of cut. 


Excava- 
tion. 


Cost of ex- 
cavation. 


Afiles. 
24.0 
19.0 


Cubic yds. 
7, 500, 000 
1, 950, 000 


$900,000 
234,000 


9.0 
9.0 


4,000,000 
3,046,000 


560,000 
426, 440 


9.0 
6.0 


3,000,000 
740,000 


360,000 
88,800 


2.0 
.9 


600,000 
111,000 


72,000 
13,320 



RECAPITULATION. 



16-foot 
depth. 



12-foot 
depth. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way, 800 acres, at $25 
Harbor of refuge 

Estimated cost 



15, 100,000 
44.0 



$1,892,000 
20,000 
1,000,000 



2, 912, 000 



5,847,000 
34.9 



$762, 560 
20,000 
1,000,000 



1,782,000 



(Length of route, 82.5 miles.) 



Far Creek route. 



Length 
of cut. 


Excava- 
tion. 


Miles. 
24.0 
19.0 


Cubic yds. 
7, 500, 000 
1,950,000 


10.2 
10.2 


6, 000, 000 
4, 737,000 


5.5 
1.5 


1, 200, 000 
591,000 


2.0 
.9 


600, 000 
111,000 



Cost of ex- 
cavation. 



Alligator River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Across to shore of Pamlico Sound, at 14 cents per cubic yard 

16-foot depth - 

12-foot depth 

Pamlico Sound to deep water, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Bluff Shoal, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



$900,000 
234,000 

840, 000 
663, 180 

144, 000 
70, 920 

72, 000 
13,320 



RECAPITULATION. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way, 1,000 acres, at $40 

Bridges 

Harbor of refuge 

Estimated cost 



16-foot 
depth. 



15,300,000 
41.7 



$1,956,000 
40,000 
10,000 
1,000,000 



3,006, 000 



12-foot 
depth. 



7,389, 000 
31.6 

$981, 420 
40,000 
10,000 
1,000,000 



2,031,420 



(Length of route, 75.2 miles.) 



LNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 123 

Juniper Bay route. 



Length 
of cut. 



Excava- 
tion. 



Cost of ex- 
cavation. 



Alligator River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Across land t" head of bay, at 14 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Juniper Bay, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



Miles. 
24.0 
19.0 

22.7 
22.7 

8.7 
4.7 



Cubic yards. 
7,500,000 
1,950,000 

12,000,000 
7,866,000 

3,200,000 
720,000 



$900,000 
234,000 

1,680,000 
1,101,240 

384,000 
86, 400 



RECAPITULATION. 



16-foot 
depth. 



12-foot 
depth. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way, 2,100 acres, at $50 

Bridges 

Harbor of refuge 

Estimated cost 



22,700,000 
55.4 



$2,964,000 
105,000 
30,000 
1,000,000 



4,099,000 



10,536,000 
46.4 



$1,421,640 
105,000 
30,000 
1,000,000 



2,556,640 



(Length of route, 70.5 miles.) 

The above estimates are for the direct line across Lake Hattamus- 
keet. If a meandering line to the eastward of this lake is adopted, it 
will be about 5 miles longer and will increase the cost of the land cut 
by about 22 per cent. 

Rose Bay route. 



Alligator River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Across land to shore of Rose Bay, at 14 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Rose Bay, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



Length 
of cut. 



Miles. 
25.4 
18.4 

26.3 
26.3 

4.1 
3.9 



Excava- 
tion. 



Cubic yards. 
7,600,000 
2,750,000 

15,827,000 
11,991,000 

1,500,000 
617,000 



Cost of ex- 
cavation. 



$912,000 
330,000 

2,215,780 
1,678,740 

180,000 
74,040 



RECAPITULATION. 



16-foot 
depth. 



12-foot 
depth. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way, 2,600 acres, at $40 
Bridges 

Estimated cost.. 



24,927,000 
55.8 



$3,307,780 
104,000 
30,000 



3,441,780 



15,358,000 
48.6 



$2,082,780 
104,000 
30,000 



2,216,780 



(Length of route, 80.5 miles.) 



124 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Pungo Rimer route. 



Length 
of cut. 


Excava- 
tion. 


Cost of ex- 
cavation. 


Miles. 
24.0 
19.0 


Cubic yards. 
7,500,000 
1,950,000 


$900,000 
234,000 


7.0 
7.0 


3,000,000 
420,000 


360,000 
50,400 


21.3 
21.3 


12,750,000 
7,930,000 


1,785,000 
1,110,200 


5.5 
1.0 


1,000,000 
160,000 


120,000 
19,200 



Alligator River to common point, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Upper part of Alligator River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Land cut to Pungo River, at 14 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Pungo River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth *. 

12-foot depth 



RECAPITULATION. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 

Length of cuts (miles) 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way, 2,300 acres, at $40 
Bridges 

Estimated cost 



16-foot 
depth. 



24,250,000 
57.8 



$3,165,000 
92,000 
30,000 



3,287,000 



12-foot 
depth. 



10,460,000 
48.3 



$1,413,800 

92,000 
30,000 



1,535,800 



(Length of route, 96.4 miles.) 



Modified Pungo River route. 



Alligator River to common point, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Land cut to Pungo River, at 14 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 

Pungo River, at 12 cents per cubic yard: 

16-foot depth 

12-foot depth 



Length 
of cut. 



Miles. 
24.0 
19.0 

26.0 
26.0 

5.5 
L0 



Excava- 
tion. 



Cost of ex- 
cavation. 



Cubic yds. 
7,500,000 
1,950,000 

16,000,000 
12, 100,000 

1,000,000 
160,000 



RECAPITULATION. 



16-foot 
depth. 



Excavation (cubic yards) 
Length of cuts (miles) — 

Cost of excavation 

Right of way 

Bridges 

Estimated cost 



24,500,000 
55.5 



$3,260,000 
100,000 
30,000 



3,390,000 



(Length of route, 94 miles.) 



INTRAC OASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 125 



Comparison of different routes. 



.Name of route. 


16-foot depth. 


12-foot depth. 


Length 
of route. 


Length 
of land 
cuts. 


Length 
of cuts in 
natural 
water- 
ways. 


Cost. 


Length 
of land 
cuts. 


Length 
of cuts in 
natural 
water- 
ways. 


Cost. 




Miles. 


Miles. 


Miles. 




Miles. 


Miles. 




Croatan Sound 


86. 4 


0.0 


43.0 


$2,372,000 


0.0 


8.4 


$183,320 




82 5 


9.0 


35.0 


i 2,912,000 


9.0 


25.9 


i 1,782,560 


Far Creek 


75.2 


10.2 


3L5 


i 3,006,000 


10.2 


• 21.4 


i 2,031,420 




70.5 


22 7 


32 7 


i 4,099,000 


22.7 


23. 7 


i 2,556,640 


Rose Bay 


80.5 


26.3 


29.5 


3,441,780 


26.3 


22.3 


2,216,780 


Pungo River 


96.4 


2L3 


36.5 


2 3,287,000 


21.3 


27.0 


2 1,535,800 


Modified Pungo River 


94.0 


26.0 


29.5 


3,390,000 


26.0 


20.0 


2,077,200 



1 To construction cost has been added $1,000,000, estimated cost of necessary harbor of refuge at Pamlico 
Sound entrance. 

2 Quantities taken from report of former board. No survey ever made of this route. Quantities and 
total estimated cost believed to be too small. 



Except the accurate data secured by the recent survey of the 
Rose Bay route and of the Modified Pungo River route, it has been 
possible to secure but little information in addition to that set forth 
in the reports of former boards. 

An inspection of the table next above shows a wide discrepancy 
between the first cost of a 12-foot waterway via Croatan Sound and 
the cost of a similar waterway via any one of the other possible 
routes. This discrepancy is not nearly so marked where the greater 
depth of 16 feet is considered. The board believes that future 
development may necessitate deepening the waterway to at least 
16 feet and that the relative costs of the different routes for such 
greater depths should have some bearing upon the choice of route; 
it also believes that the manifest disadvantages of the Croatan Sound 
route even for a depth of 12 feet as set forth below, warrant its 
rejection and the recommendation of a route whose first cost is 
much greater. 

Croatan Sound route. — Croatan Sound lies between Roanoke Island 
and the mainland; it has an average width of about 3 miles; its 
bottom is very irregular, there being depths as great as 6 fathoms, 
but no continuous channel with a depth greater than 9 feet. There 
are no lunar tides in this sound, but there are currents, sometimes 
in one direction, sometimes in the other, due to the fluctuations 
caused by winds in the large bodies of water which it connects. The 
bottom of this sound is sandy, and, while few marked changes, due to 
natural causes, seem to take place in the existing channel, there is 
some evidence that where artificial channels are dredged nature 
tends to obliterate such channels quickly and to restore the bottom 
to its original condition. Both the 1903 and the 1906 boards cite 
the fact that in 1901 a cut was made near Croatan Light, 200 feet 
wide and 12 feet deep, where the natural central depth was but 10 
feet, and that shortly thereafter no trace could be found of this 
dredging; for a 16-foot waterway through this sound, dredging 
would have to be done for a length of over 40 miles, and if similar 
shoaling of the dredged cut did take place the maintenance of such 
a waterway would be very difficult and costly. From the southern 
end of Croatan Sound the route passes through the broad waters of 



126 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Pamlico Sound, where storms of considerable severity are not infre- 
quent. It also must cross Bluff Shoal, on which the natural depth 
at the crossing is not over 11 feet, and the distance between 16-foot 
contours about 2 miles. Such a cut will be in an exposed location 
and may require frequent redredging for its maintenance. 

The Long Shoal and Far Creek routes differ but little in cost, length 
of land cut, and in physical characteristics. Following either of these 
routes it is necessary to cross Bluff Shoal, as set forth for the route 
next above. Except near the entrance to Pamlico Sound and at 
the Bluff Shoal crossing the maintenance of the waterway by either 
of these two routes will be easy and inexpensive. It is thought that 
a dredged channel in Alligator River, where it is well sheltered and 
where there are practically no currents, will suffer but little deteriora- i 
tion; the elevation of the banks of the land cuts will be but little i 
above the water level, and the maintenance of these cuts will prob- i 
ably involve but little subsequent work. 

At the Pamlico Sound ends of these routes there are no natural 
harbors, no shelter for vessels from the severe storms that sweep 
over this sound, and if either of these routes be chosen it will be .f 
necessary to provide a harbor of refuge, the cost of which will be i 
great, and this should be taken into consideration in any estimate of 
the total cost of the waterway via either of these routes. The 1903 J 
board roughly estimated the cost of such a harbor of refuge at f 
SI, 000,000, and this estimate has been retained in the tables pre- I 
ceding. 

The Juniper Bay route. — Without a considerable detour to the 
eastward, which will add to its length and cost, this route must cross 
Lake Mattamuskeet. It is known that plans have been made f or j 
draining this lake and the country immediately adjacent thereto, 
and it is very probable that these plans will be carried out in the 
near future. A canal across the lake will interfere seriously with 
them, and with the elaborate system of drainage ditches will neces- 
sitate the establishment and maintenance of additional pumping 
stations, and it may be well to. avoid carrying the waterway across 
this drainage district, even at a somewhat greater first cost for 
excavation and at some sacrifice of directness of route. This route 
passes into Pamlico Sound through Juniper Bay, the entrance to 
which is quite open and exposed to the southeast, whence come the o 
most violent storms, though not the storms of longest duration. C 
This route and those subsequently mentioned avoid the Bluff Shoal ft 
crossing. 

The Rose Bay route. — The direct line for this route crosses Lake 
Mattamuskeet, but for the reasons above given it was thought best h 
to carry the survey on a slightly longer meandering line to the west- B 
ward of the lake and the proposed drainage district. Rose, Bay is \ 
well protected from storms; the deep water of the sound makes well M 
up in the bay; there is thus formed a harbor with fair depth and' 
area, both of which can be readily increased if necessary. The rest; 
of the route from Rose Bay to Adams Creek (which has already been 1 b 
adopted as part of this waterway) is comparatively sheltered. Rosej 
Bay is also near the mouth of the Pamlico River and not far distant ! 
from the shipping points located thereon. 

This route runs through a country part of which is fairly well! 
timbered, and all of which is said to be quite fertile. Its isolation 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 127 



and lack of ready access to markets have prevented its development. 
A waterway via this route would probably increase greatly the value 
of the adjacent land and stimulate the development of all its natural 
resources. 

The Pungo River route. — This route, described by the 1906 board, 
leaves Alligator River at a point farther upstream than the Rose 
Bay line and then runs across country to the Pungo River. It offers 
advantages similar to those on the Rose Bay route; the harbor in 
Pungo River is larger and even more sheltered, and a railroad reaches 
this stream at a point convenient to the water route, but the distance 
via this water route is some 15 miles greater than via the surveyed 
Rose Bay line. No survey of the Pungo River line has ever been 
made; the quantities of materials were calculated by the 1906 board 
from such maps of this region as were available, and, for accurate 
computations, the data supplied by these maps is not sufficient. 
The board believes that the estimate of cost of this route in the 

E receding tables, based upon the quantities calculated by the 1906 
oard, is probably too small, and that even if the cost of this line 
! should be somewhat less than that of the Rose Bay route, this latter 
[and much shorter route is decidedly preferable. 

Modified Pungo River route. — From a point on the Rose Bay 
surveyed line a survey was made of a line to Pungo River, furnishing 
a basis for an accurate estimate of the quantities of materials to be 
removed along a practicable route from Alligator River to Pungo 
[River. A waterway 12 feet deep along this line would cost about 
$140,000 less than along the Rose Bay line, but it would be some 
[13.5 miles longer, and the shorter, though slightly more expensive, 
j route is given the preference. 

Route recommended. — After a thorough study of the relative ad- 
vantages and disadvantages of all the possible routes, the board 
[recommends that the Rose Bay route be adopted for this portion of 
[the waterway joining Albemarle and Pamlico Sounds, and that, in 
[accordance with its recommendation for the first section of the 
waterway from Norfolk to Beaufort, the depth along this route be 
made 12 feet at mean low water for the present. 

The cost of such a 12-foot waterway via the Rose Bay route is 
estimated, as above, at $2,216,780. This sum is very largely in excess 
of the estimated first cost, $183,320, of such a waterway through 
Croatan Sound, but the board believes that the reasons set forth 
fully justify it in recommending a route whose first cost is so much 
greater. 

On this portion of the through route the cost of maintenance 
becomes a matter of decided importance. Considering first the 
Rose Bay route, that portion which lies in Alligator River, some 
24 miles, will require but little deepening to give the 12-foot depth; 
in this river the currents are slight, the protection from storms is 
excellent, and once the channel is excavated, there is every reason 
bo expect that it can be maintained for a merely nominal annual 
expenditure; the land cut, some 26 miles in length, passes through 
X comparatively level and low-lying country where the maximum 
leight of the surface is but about 8 feet above mean low- water level; 
;he vertical height of the canal banks will uot be great; the borings 
ndicate that the material \,hich will be encountered in excavating 



128 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



will be mainly sand, and it is thought that the banks will soon take 
a slope which will be quite permanent, and that thereafter the cost 
of maintenance will be but a small sum annually. 

In Croatan Sound conditions are quite the reverse; here all the 
available evidence goes to show the decided instability of dredged 
cuts; it is known that there are here currents of considerable strength, 
sometimes in one direction, sometimes in the other; it is known that 
a dredged channel but 2 feet deeper than the natural depth was 
obliterated in a short time. This channel was dug in 1901; when 
next examined, five years later, no trace of it could be found. If 
the rate of deterioration thus indicated should exist in other dredged 
channels, and there is no reason to doubt that it will do so, the 
annual cost of maintenance will probably represent a capital sum 
which will largely, if not entirely, offset the lesser first cost of this 
route compared with the Rose Bay route. The length of the dredged 
channel through Croatan Sound for greater depths than 12 feet 
increases rapidly, and for a depth of 16 feet the length of dredged 
channel would be in excess of 40 miles, and it seems probable that 
practically continouus dredging would be necessary to maintain in 
such a channel its proper dimensions. 

The Croatan Sound route makes necessary the crossing of Bluff 
Shoal and the dredging of a channel practically 1 mile long between 
12-foot contours. Considering its exposure and the well-known vio- 
lence of the storms in Pamlico Sound, the maintenance of such a 
channel across this shoal would be a matter of difficulty. The 
Croatan Sound route compels all shipping to traverse the entire 
length of Pamlico Sound, and at its widest part the route must pass 
through the middle of the Sound. As indicated above, the storms in 
Pamlico Sound are quite severe, and the exposure of shipping via this 
route would be great, while there is no intermediate harbor where 
vessels could take refuge in stormy weather. 

The Rose Bay route avoids the Bluff Shoal crossing entirely, and, 
being practically an inland route all the way, there is no danger at all 
from storms, while in the Alligator River at the north end and in 
Rose Bay at the south end there are excellent natural harbors. 

Along the Croatan Sound route the local traffic will be practically 
nothing — there are no shipping points — nor will this route open up 
any new country. The Rose Bay route will pass directly through an 
undeveloped country, but one which is said to be naturally very rich, 
and which will develop rapidly as soon as transportation routes arq 
opened. 

PEOM PAMLICO SOUND TO BEAUFORT INLET. 

No matter what route be followed to Pamlico Sound, the rout* 
thence to Beaufort Inlet has already been fixed by the adoption bj 
Congress of the Adams Creek route from the Neuse River southward 
and the canal along this route has been excavated to a depth of 1( 
feet at mean low water, the depth fixed by the law providing for it$ 
construction, but the board recommends that it be deepened to 15 
feet at mean low water. 

Assuming that the Rose Bay route to Pamlico Sound be adopted 
as recommended above, the board further recommends that fron 
Rose Bay to Adams Creek the waterway be carried across Bran 



lite 

lolt 
4 

hi 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 129 



Shoal, which will shorten the distance by about 12 miles, and will 
,!!'<•<-> -'Hi t cite the following work: 



brant Shoal. 


Length of 
cuts. 


Excavation. 


Cost oJ 
excavation. 




Miles. 

2.1 
1.0 


Cv. yds. 
850, 000 
360, 000 


$127,500 
54, 000 


12-foot depth 





This cut across Brant Shoal being quite short and in sheltered 
waters can probably be maintained without any great expense. 

From Neuse River to Beaufort the route via Adams and Core 
Creeks has already been selected, and this link in the waterway has 
been completed with a depth of 10 feet. No further discussion or 
recommendation as to the location of this portion of the route is 
necessary. 

The cost of deepening the Adams Creek Canal to 12 feet at mean 
Sow water, as ascertained from the officer in charge, is estimated at 
$207,500, and of the additional work necessary to give the same 
depth to Beaufort Inlet at $190,000. 

The following table sets forth the total cost of the waterway from 
Norfolk to Beaufort along the recommended route: 





16-foot 
depth. 


12-foot 
depth. 


Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound, Rose Bay route 

Brant Shoal Cut 


3,441,780 
127,500 


•12,733,300 
2,216,780 
54,000 
397,500 

5,401,580 


Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Inlet, via Adams Creek Canal 

Total for 12-foot depth 







As the estimates and recommendations of the board for the remainder 
of the route from Norfolk to Beaufort are based upon a minimum depth 
of 12 feet, the board strongly recommends that the Adams Creek 
Canal be deepened to this same depth, and that this depth be carried 
further to Beaufort Inlet at the estimated cost given in the table 
next above. 

Commercial necessity. — The commercial importance of an inland 
waterway from Norfolk, Va., to Beaufort, N. C, has been discussed 
at great length in former reports, and in the report published in 
House Document No. 563, Fifty-eighth Congress, second session, there 
appear many communications from commencal bodies and others 
interested, in which are set forth in detail various estimates of the 
amount of commerce jvhich would be benefited by such a waterway 
and of the actual saving in freight rates and insurance which would 
follow its completion. 

In all previous discussions this portion of the inland waterway has 
been considered as a separate, concrete proposition, but now its 
importance is enhanced by reason of the possible development of free 
inland waterways extending north and south from its termini. 

As has been pointed out many times, this portion of the inland 
waterway will enable the boats which will ply upon it to avoid the dan- 



22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 9 



130 INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

gers of the outside passage around Capes Hatteras and Lookout, 
dangers which have a decided effect upon the rates now charged for 
freight and insurance between north and south Atlantic ports. 

M though freight in large quantities is now carried in barges between 
many points on the Atlantic coast north of Cape Hatteras, where the 
distances between harbors which can afford shelter in stormy weather 
are comparatively short, yet owing to the difficulties and dangers of 
Cape Hatteras and Cape Lookout, and to the fact that there is no 
safe harbor for many miles south of the entrance to Chesapeake Bay, 
all attempts to introduce the barge system on the south Atlantic coast 
have been unsuccessful. There is some reason to believe, however, 
that the opening of the inland waterway, avoiding the most danger- 
ous portion of the coast, would shortly be followed by an extension 
of the barge method of transportation to and from south Atlantic 
ports, and by a resulting decrease in freight and insurance charges. 

There is already a considerable commerce in barges from Norfolk 
and points to the southward, some of which passes out of Chesapeake 
Bay, while some goes through to Philadelphia by the existing inland 
route. The draft and the carrying capacity of such barges as now 
use the inland routes are limited by the available depth therein, 
while this commerce is also hampered by the toll charges on the 
privately-owned canals forming portions thereof. With free inland 
waterways with greater depth than now exists there is every reason 
to believe that this commerce would be greatly stimulated, and that 
it would soon show a substantial increase. 

The country through which such a waterway south of Norfolk will 
pass is largely undeveloped, although its natural resources are great, 
and it is capable of being made highly productive. Within the area 
which would be tributary to this waterway there is still much standing 
timber; it is understood that many of the owners of timbered lands 
are now conserving their forests, and that they expect them to yield 
considerable quantities of lumber for many years to come. Much of 
the land adjacent to this proposed waterway is admirably adapted 
for truck and fruit; it is expected that the opening of the water route 
will stimulate these industries and that such produce can be trans- 
ported economically by water to northern markets in small vessels 
or in barges equipped, if necessary, with refrigerating plants. 

While the opening of the Norfolk-Beaufort link in the inland water- 
way would no doubt result in a very substantial saving in freight 
charges, just what would be the amount of such saving it is not so 
easy to predict. The board has examined with care all the state- 
ments heretofore submitted by commercial bodies and others and has 
checked the figures given therein as thoroughly as possible. After a 
study of these statistics, the 1902 board estimated that the annual 
saving in freight charges on " through" freight which would be car- 
ried between the termini of this portion of the waterway would prob- 
ably not be less than $600,000. In view of the possible development 
of free inland waterways north and south of the Norfolk-Beaufort 
section, the board believes this estimate of the probable saving to be 
a conservative one. 

It has been shown above that the existing commerce, although 
handicapped by the small depth in the canals south of Norfolk, actu- 
ally pays in tolls to the owners of these canals no less than $100,000 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 131 

annually. Making free the waterway between Norfolk and Albe- 
marle Sound will result in saving this sum at once, while if this free 
Waterway is given the dimensions recommended herein, there seems 
to be no doubt that there will be a substantial increase in this com- 
merce and that the actual saving may be, at the least calculation, 
twice the amount now paid in tolls, or some $200,000. 

An annual saving of this sum capitalized at 3 per cent would 
amount to over $6,000,000, about twice the estimated cost of con- 
structing that portion of the waterway which will connect the Eliza- 
beth River at Norfolk with Albemarle Sound and considerably more 
than the estimated cost of the entire waterway from Norfolk to 
Beaufort. 

Add to this almost certain annual saving any saving which might 
be effected on through freight which would follow this route in pref- 
erence to taking the outside passage around the Capes and also any 
saving on the local traffic which would be developed along the water- 
way south of Albemarle Sound, and it seems certain that the resulting 
total benefit to commerce will be enough to warrant the statement 
that as a mere business proposition the construction of the inland 
waterway from Norfolk to Beaufort is fully justified. 

The military importance of such a waterway likewise has been the 
subject of numerous reports. It will furnish a ready means for the 
transport of troops and supplies along a portion of the seacoast and 
a sheltered interior route for torpedo boats, destroyers, and sub- 
marines. 

Considering the moderate cost and the probable commercial and 
military importance of such an inland waterway, the board is of the 
opinion that its construction is worthy of being undertaken by the 
United States, and it recommends that it be constructed along the 
route specified above. 

As it is proposed to make this portion of the waterway sea level, no 
questions of water-power development enter into this discussion. 

At Norfolk, the northern terminus of this section of the waterway, 
there are ample facilities for the transfer of freight between cars and 
boats and, while there are no public wharves at present, the building 
of such wharves is being discussed, and it is possible that their con- 
struction may be undertaken. 

Respectfully submitted. 

W. M. Black, 

Colonel, Corps of Engineers, United States Army. 

Frederic V. Abbot, 
Colonel, Corps of Engineers, United States Army. 

J. C. Sanford, 
Lieut. Col., Corps of Engineers, United States Army. 

Mason M. Patrick, 
Lieut. Col., Corps of Engineers, United States Army. 

R. R. Raymond, 
Major, Corps of Engineers, United States Army. 

The Chief of Engineers, United States Army. 



INDEX OF APPENDIXES TO ACCOMPANY REPORT ON BOSTON- 
BEAUFOflT INLET DIVISION, PROPOSED INTRACOASTAL WATER- 
WAY, DATED OCTOBER 4, 1911. 

Page. 

Appendix A 1. Report of the Commission on Inland Waterways on a free ship 

canal connecting Boston and Narragansett Bay, May 1, 1911. 135 
Report of the transportation committee of the Providence Board 
of Trade on the commercial value of the proposed intracoastal 

waterway to Rhode Island 153 

Letter from Hon. A. J. Pothier, governor of Rhode Island, to 

the honorable the general assembly, January 24, 1911 159 

Formula deduced from experiments for increased width neces- 
sary on curves in canal construction 160 

Table of commercial statistics on the navigable waterways and 
the population and manufacturing statistics of the principal 
cities tributary to the New York Bay-Delaware River section 

of the proposed intracoastal waterway 162 

Report of the committee on traffic of the proposed intracoastal 

canal connecting New York and Delaware Bays 175 

Resolutions of the State of New Jersey 226 

Statements from commercial bodies interested in the construc- 
tion of the proposed intracoastal waterway 227 

Special report, Board of Trade of Camden, N. J 231 

Special report, New York Produce Exchange 236 

Special report, Trenton Chamber of Commerce 239 

Special report, Board of Trade of the City of Newark, N. J 

Letter from Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co., June 14, 1910. . 
Letter from Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co., July 12, 1910. . 
Letters from Baltimore & Philadelphia Steamboat Co., Phila- 
delphia, Pa., January 31, 1911; River and Harbor Improve- 
ment Co. (contractors), Philadelphia, Pa., January 31, 1911; 
and J. B. Blades Lumber Co., Newbern, N. C, March, 1911. 
Stenographic report of public hearing held at Norfolk, Va., Sep- 
tember 6, 1910 249 



B 1. 



B 2. 
C 1. 

C2. 



C3. 

4. 
C5. 

C6. 
7. 
C8. 
C 9. 
D 1. 
D 2. 
D3. 



E. 



246 
247 
248 



248 



133 



[Appendix A l.J 



Report of the Commission on Inland Waterways on a Free Ship Canal Con- 
necting Boston and Narragansett Bay. 

[According to Chapter 26, Resolves of 1911, May 1, 1911. | 

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 

Senate, 
February 28, 1911. 

The committee on harbors and public lands, to whom was referred so much of the 
governor's address (Senate, No. 1) concerning transportation as relates to the develop- 
ment of the internal waterways of the State, report the accompanying resolve. 

For the committee. 

George Holden Tinkham. 

Resolve to Provide for the Appointment of a Commission to Consider in 
what Manner the Commonwealth may best Cooperate with the Federal 
Government and Certain Other States in the Development of Inland 
Waterways. 

Resolved, That the governor, with the advice and consent of the council, shall 
within 30 days after the passage of this resolve appoint a commission consisting of 
seven persons, citizens of the Commonwealth, one of whom he shall designate as 
chairman — 

To consider in what manner the Commonwealth of Massachusetts may best cooperate 
with the Federal Government in the construction of a ship canal — free and open to 
the commerce of the world and without tolls or charges for the passage of freight 
thereon — across the State as now being surveyed by the Engineers of the United States 
War Department, under the provisions of section 13 of the rivers and harbors act 
approved March 3, 1909; the same being a link of the proposed Intracoastal Waterway 
between Boston and the Rio Grande in Texas, and in harmony with the plan advocated 
by the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association ; 

To consider how best the Commonwealth may cooperate with other States along 
the Atlantic seaboard — more especially Rhode Island — in the development of these 
inland waterways; 

To consider the value of such a canal to the State and its inhabitants in the develop- 
ment of industries, the reduction in the cost of handling raw material and manu- 
factured products or otherwise, and the benefit to transportation generally along the 
Altantic coast. 

The commission shall serve without pay. The commission shall report in print 
to the general court on or before May 1, 1911. 

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 

Boston, May 1, 1911. 

To the Great and General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: 

The commission on inland waterways appointed by the governor in accordance 
with the resolve of the legislature 1911, senate No. 362, has the honor to report: 

The resolve limits the duties of the commission to the consideration of a free ship 
canal to be constructed and maintained by the Federal Government, connecting Bos- 
ton and Narragansett Bay, as now being surveyed by the Engineers of the United 
States Army. This proposed canal is the northern one of a proposed system of intra- 
coastal waterways advocated by the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association. The 
rivers and harbors act approved March 3, 1909, authorized and appropriated for 
surveys of these intracoastal waterways in the following terms: 

"Survey for the construction of a continuous waterway inland where practicable 
from Boston, Mass., to Long Island Sound, including a waterway from the protected 
waters of Narragansett Bay through the ponds and lagoons lying along the southern 
coast of Rhode Island to Watch Hill and Fishers Island " * * * "to the sounds of 
North Carolina and Beaufort Inlet, N. C. " * * * "with a maximum depth 
of 25 feet, or such lesser depths along any section or sections of the said waterway 
as may be found to be sufficient for commercial, naval, or military purposes. 
Such survey shall include an examination of all practicable routes, the preparation of 

135 



186 TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



plans and estimates of cost along the most available route, and a report upon the desira- 
bility of utilizing as a part of such waterway any existing public or private canal, or 
any part thereof, and the probable cost of acquiring the same." * * * "Pro- 
vided, That whenever, in the making of a survey of any of the preceding waterways, 
field work shall indicate that the proposed improvement is clearly inadvisable no 
detailed survey or plans shall be made." 

Under this act the Chief of Engineers made an allotment from the general appro- 
priation of $40,000 for the cost of the survey of the canal from Boston to Narragansett 
Bay, and the work has been performed by Lieut. Col. F. V. Abbot, Corps of Engineers, 
district engineer of Boston, through whose courtesy and by authority of the Chief of 
Engineers of the United States Army, the commission has been furnished with full 
information. 

THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAYS SYSTEM. 

The intracoastal waterways as now projected consist of the following canals: 
Boston, Mass., to Narragansett Bay. 
Narragansett B ay to Watch Hill. 
Raritan River to Delaware River. 
Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay. 

Norfolk, Va., to the sounds of North Carolina and Beaufort Inlet. 

These canals are to be surveyed for a maximum depth of 25 feet or such lesser depths 
along any section as may be found sufficient for commercial, naval, or military 
purposes. 

Beaufort, N. C, to the Cape Fear River. 
Cape Fear River to Winyah Bay, S. C. 
Winyah Bav to St. Johns River, Fla. 
St. Johns River to Key West, Fla. 

These canals from Beaufort, S. C, are to be surveyed for a maximum depth of 12 
feet or such lesser depths along any section as may be found sufficient for commercial, 
naval, or military purposes. 

A canal across the State of Florida between suitable points on the eastern and the 
Gulf coasts of 12 feet or lesser depth. 

A survey is also authorized for the construction of a continuous waterway inland 
where practicable along the Gulf of Mexico from St. Georges Sound to the Mississippi 
River at New Orleans and from thence to the Rio Grande. The Gulf inland canals 
are to be surveyed for a maximum depth of 9 feet or such lesser depths as may be 
recommended. 

THE BOSTON-NARRAGANSETT BAY CANAL. 

The Army Engineers in preparing the project for the Boston-Narragansett Bay Canal 
have made surveys of approximately seven different routes between the Taunton 
River and Boston Harbor and by elimination of the routes where a practicable location 
was not to be found have now limited their choice to two routes — one from Taunton 
River to Plymouth Harbor, and the other from the Taunton River into Boston Harbor 
near Hingham. (See inserted plan.) 

The general features of the canal project common to all the estimates which have 
been prepared are based on having no curves of less than 2,200-foot radius; the side 
slopes are 1 rise to 2 base and are to be protected against wash. The locks are to be 80 
feet wide in the clear and 500 feet long in the clear. In each case estimates have been 
prepared for bottom widths of 125 feet and 200 feet and a depth of water of 18 feet 
and 25 feet. (See p. 32.) 

For a ship canal, both a bottom width of 125 feet and a depth of 18 feet are inadmis- 
sible, and, therefore, the commission confines itself to a consideration of the surveys 
and estimates for a 25-foot depth canal, 200 feet bottom width. 

DESCRIPTION OF TAUNTON-PLYMOUTH ROUTE. 

On the Taunton-Plymouth route a sea-level cut is possible and the estimates have 
been prepared accordingly for both sea level and a lock canal. The canal begins at 
Fall River, 119,295 population; follows the Taunton River passing the town of Somer- 
set, 2,798 population; Dighton, 2,235 population; passes within 2 miles of Berkley, 990 
population, and a mile and a half of Taunton, 34,259 population; 3£ miles from Bridge- 
water, 7,688 population; 9 miles from Brockton, 56,876 population; 1 mile from Halifax, 
550 population; through Kingston, 2,445 population, to Plymouth, 12,141 population. 

On a 20-foot summit-level canal the first lock is about one-half mile south of Weir 
village and has a lift of 20 feet at low tide; the second lock is just east of Holmes Hill, 
in the town of Kingston, with a lift of 20 feet at mean low water. The summit level is 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 137 



about 26 miles long and will be supplied partly by a natural drainage and partly by 
pumping salt water from the Jones River. 

On the sea-level Plymouth route, the first tide lock is about one-half mile north of 
Dighton and has a lift of about 4 feet at mean low water. The second tide lock will 
occupy the site east of Holmes Hill in the town of Kingston and will have a lift of about 
10 feet at mean low water. The natural fresh-water drainage and the difference in 
times of tide at the two ends will be sufficient to fill the summit level without recourse 
to pumping. The sea level route has in reality a summit level of 10 feet above mean 
low water, and the canal will be filled with fresh water for most of the year. Three 
branch lines of railroad are crossed, necessitating three double-track drawbridges; 25 
highways are crossed, requiring 22 power-operated highway drawbridges. 

The canal route from Fall River to Plymouth is 37 miles. 

The estimated cost of the sea-level canal is $47,133,000, and the annual cost of main- 
tenance, capitalized at 4 per cent, amounts to $11,835,000, making a total, including 
maintenance, of $58,968,000. 

The estimated cost of the 20-foot summit-lock canal, with bottom width of 200 feet 
and depth of 25 feet, is $26,848,000. The cost of annual maintenance, capitalized at 4 
per cent, is $14,785,000, making a total of $41,633,000. 

DESCRIPTION OF THE TAUNTON-HINGHAM ROUTE. 

The canal enters the Taunton River at Fall River, 119,295 population; passes Somer- 
set, 2,798 population; Dighton, 2,235 population; passes within 1£ miles of Taunton, 
34,259 population; 3^ miles of Bridgewater, 7,688 population; 9^ miles of Brockton, 
56,876 population; about a mile and a half from Hanson, 1,854 population; through 
Hanover, 2,326 population; Norwell, 1,410 population; Marshfield, 1,738 population; 
through Scituate, 2,482 population; through Cohasset, 2,585 population, to Hingham, 
4,965 population. 

This canal has its summit level 35 feet above mean low water. The first lock is 
about one and a half miles south of Weir village and has a lift of 20 feet at mean low 
tide. The second is in the town of Halifax, about one-half mile northeast of the con- 
fluence of the Taunton and Wenatuxet Rivers. This lift is 15 feet. The third and 
fourth locks are in the town of Hingham near the Nantasket Junction station of the 
New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad. They are in flight with lifts of 17^ feet 
each at mean low water. 

The summit level extends from the second to the third lock, a length of about 26 
miles, of which about 6 miles is through a lake formed by damming the North River 
just west of Union Bridge. About one-half of the supply of the summit level will 
have to be provided by pumping salt water from the North River below the dam 
so that under ordinary conditions the water in the canal will be brackish. The length 
of the canal from Fall River to Hingham is 52 miles, crossing four branch lines of 
railroad, necessitating three double-track drawbridges and one single-track draw- 
bridge; also crossing 46 highways, requiring 30 power-operated drawbridges. The 
right of way for the canal is estimated to occupy 6,000 acres, and 3,000 acres additional 
would be flooded by the lake in the summit level. The engineers have estimated 
$900,000 for right of way, land damages, and damages to water privileges. 

The estimated cost of the 35-foot summit Taunton-Hingham Canal with 200 feet 
bottom width and 25 feet depth, is $40,047,000, and the cost of annual maintenance, 
capitalized at 4 per cent, is $20,903,000, making a total of $60,950,000. 

We are informed that in making the surveys across Massachusetts that a route via 
Brockton was found impracticable and eliminated. A Brockton canal would have 
required a summit level of about 120 to 130 feet; would have involved a large num- 
ber of locks, causing excessive cost of construction, and would have required pumping 
water from a long distance for the supply of the summit level, adding considerably 
to the cost of construction and excessively to the cost of maintenance. 

The commissioners held the following meetings : 

On April 3, 1911, at the statehouse for organization; J. J. Martin elected secretary. 

On April 5, 1911, at the office of Col. F. V. Abbot, Corps of Engineers, United States 
Army, Barristers Hall, Boston, where Col. Abbot explained the surveys and gave 
such information as was requested. 

On April 7, 1911, an executive session. 

On April 11, 1911, at the statehouse, where a public hearing was given. On the 
same date an executive session of the commission following the public hearing. 
On April 21, 1911, an executive session. 
On April 25, 1911, an executive session. 
On May 1, 1911, an executive session. 



138 INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE COMMISSION. 

A letter from Col. F. V. Abbot, of the Corps of Engineers, United States Army, dated 
December 27, 1910, giving information and estimates for the canal surveys and inviting 
information from all who might use it or were located upon the route, with reference to 
the necessity for such a canal or with reference to its commercial, Daval, or military 
value, to be shown by data from reliable sources. 

Memorandum from Col. Abbot of certain replies to the above letter. From nearly 
1,000 of these letters sent out, those mentioned below are the ones containing responsive 
information: 

Town of Plymouth, Mass., January 16, 1911, by Charles C. Doten, harbor engineer for 

the town, and approved by the selectmen. 

"Evidence of commercial interest is furnished by the wreck chart published by the 
United States Engineer officer at Newport, R. I., in 1905, recording 1,076 wrecks from 
Fishers Island and Long Island Sound to the northerly end of Cape Cod, as occurring 
for a period of 23 years from 1880 to 1903. 

"As the Government does not require record of coastwise commerce, it is impossible 
to ascertain with accuracy the value and amount passing over the Boston and New 
York route. Interested parties estimate the total freight passing Vineyard Sound to 
be 25,000,000 tons annually, including 9,000,000 tons of coal — 75 per cent of the total 
pertaining to Massachusetts Bay and 25 per cent to the eastern coast and British 
Provinces. The annual produce of Massachusetts industries is $1,500,000,000 in value 
and in distribution goes principally to New York, the West, and South. Boston is 
the shipping port for a large contiguous territory and ships a liberal percentage of the 
aggregate value of the State production by sea. 

"The new coal-carrying barges which are rapidly displacing the old hulks of the 
towing companies have a draft of from 18 to 22 feet, and the merchandise steamships 
vary from 17 to 24, while passenger boats require about 14 feet. The canal should 
have not less depth than 25 feet, and bottom width of 200 feet. The shorter sea-level 
route should be chosen as quicker and easier of navigation. 

"The Taunton- Plymouth route is the only one which affords sea-level construction; 
is shorter by 27 miles than the survey to Hingham; has its terminus in a capacious, well- 
sheltered harbor. The harbor entrance is well denned; open water passage to Boston; 
30 miles along the well-defined coast. Preference is given to the Taunton-Plymouth 
project. 

"Distinguishing between the two routes reported upon, preference is unhesitatingly 
given to the Taunton-Plymouth project, but under this head more latitude may be 
taken and a better proposition discussed and recommended. It is a matter of common 
knowledge that under authority of the Government conferred upon private parties, a 
waterway of but 8 miles land cutting is being constructed across Cape Cod, to be com- 
pleted and put into operation in about two years' time. By this concession all com- 
merce which seeks safety from the passage around Cape Cod, will be subjected to toll 
or tonnage assessment. In this private and laudable enterprise, 'the line of least 
resistance' has been unerringly chosen, as the natural route of both freight and pas- 
senger service between Boston and New York. Large railroad, marine, and transpor- 
tation interests are apparently accommodating themselves to this Cape Cod route, if 
not actual promoters and builders of the canal; it therefore should be a matter of close 
inquiry as to whether there would be any considerable amount of commerce left to 
traverse an across-State waterway, even with freedom from tolls to recommend it. 
Should it appear that the Cape Cod Canal is not only the best route, but is certain to 
hold nearly all commercial travel, the wise course would be not to attempt competition 
but to exercise sovereign rights of the Government, take over that waterway on equit- 
able terms, and make of it a commercial 'short cut,' capacious enough to pass the largest 
national ships, thus establishing a quick easy line of communication between the naval 
stations at Boston, Newport, and New York, of great value, and at the same time free- 
ing the largest volume of commerce on the Altantic seaboard from a tax not in accord- 
ance with the spirit of American institutions, and satisfying its need for greater safety 
in its passages between terminal ports. 

"A concluding recommendation is that the harbor of Plymouth, which is the only 
deep-water inlet on Massachusetts Bay between the Cape Cod Canal and Boston, be 
imporved as a port of refuge and convenience by construction of a breakwater on Browns 
Island Shoal, to make its excellent anchorage perfectly secure in gales from any 
direction. This should be done in the interests of the great lines of commerce which 
will run near the harbor mouth, a portion of which may occasionally be driven to shelter 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 139 



or seek the convenience of a way port. Plymouth Harbor bears a very important 
relation to intracoastal commerce by any route established in southeastern Massa- 
chusetts." 

Ten manufacturers of Brockton, Mass., answer certain questions relating to the canal, 
of which the following answers of the George E. Keith Co., under date of October 24, 
1910, and the M. A. Packard Co., under date of October 25, 1910, are characteristic: 

George E. Keith Co. 

1. What advantage to Brockton would a waterway be, extending from Boston to 
Narragansett Bay, running through or near the city, deep enough to float the largest 
type of freight vessel? Having more especial reference to the shoe industry both in 
the carriage of freight and the transportation of fuel . 

Cheap transportation — fuel especially. Some foreign shipments of shoes. 

2. To what point does the bulk of your output go for distribution? 
Widely distributed. 

3. Where does the principal part of the leather come from used by you? 
Boston houses. 

4. Would its delivery to Brockton by boat be of advantage to you in rates or con- 
venience? 

In a few cases. 

5. Would it be of advantage either in rates or convenience to ship your output by 
water directly from Brockton? 

In a few cases. 

6. In your opinion would a line of steamers running from Brockton through an arti- 
ficial waterway to the southern ports be of advantage to you in the distribution of your 
output? 

Yes. 

7. In your opinion do the steamship lines running from Boston to Philadelphia, 
Norfolk, Baltimore, and Savannah have an influence on railroad rates not only to the 
South but the West? 

Very much. 

8. In your opinion would it be an advantage if shipments could be made from 
Brockton by barges in tow through the Sound, Hudson River, the enlarged Erie Canal, 
the Great Lakes, to the West and Northwest? 

Not in our industry. 

9. Would it be an advantage if shipments could be made from Brockton by barges in 
tow through the Sound and on intracoastal canal south, avoiding the open ocean? 

Not in our industry. 

10. In your opinion would not ocean facilities such a canal would offer be of mutual 
advantage to Brockton and vicinity? 

Yes. 

M. A. Packard Co. 

Your letter of October 24, together with questions regarding the advantages to 
Brockton of a waterway between Boston and Narragansett Bay, was received yes- 
terday. We regret that time will not permit us as full and careful reply as we would 
like to make, it being necessary for you to have your reply to-night. 

The advantages to Brockton of water routes for freight on raw material, as well as 
on our finished product, would be very great, and the time is coming when the main- 
tenance of shoe manufacturing in this section will largely depend upon securing 
advantages of this sort. 

Already western manufacturers are showing dealers in the Southwest the saving in 
freight charges between their points of distribution and New England. The trans- 
portation of fuel alone by water would prove a saving of thousands of dollars annually 
, to our manufacturers. 

i A large proportion of the goods we manufacture are shipped to southern and western 
' points, and the freight rates would be materially reduced if a large portion of the 
haul could be made in vessels. 

A great deal of the leather used in New England, both sole and upper, could be 
shipped from points like New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, and land by vessel 
in Brockton and other shoe towns at much less cost than the rail routes now employed. 

There is no reason why a line of steamers could not be profitably maintained for 
freight service, the output of our factories being about $4,000,000 per year in value, 
and a large part of this could be distributed by water routes to within short distances 
of destination. Certainly the steamship lines running between Boston, Philadelphia, 



140 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Norfolk, Baltimore, and Savannah have a very strong influence on railroad routes to 
the points mentioned and in through rates to the South and West. 

Any scheme of transportation that permits freight to be carried over a large part of 
its route by water means economy in transportation and closer relations between 
buyer and consumer. 

We ralize that there are many obstacles in the way of building the proposed canal 
between Boston and Narragansett Bay, via Brockton, and a few years ago the task 
seemed an almost useless one to attempt. Recent developments in canal construction, 
however, have had a tendency to convince people that the proposed route is both 
feasible and desirable, and the future development of New England industries will 
very largely depend upon the carrying out of progressive ideas of this kind. 

Letter of Hon. W. W. Crapo, of New Bedford, Mass., dated February 24, 1911. 

That there is needed a shorter and safer water transportation from Boston to New 
York and southern ports and return is apparent and needs no argument. It is a long 
and perilous passage over the Nantucket shoals and around Cape Cod. This is now 
being met in the construction of the sea-level Cape Cod Canal, where the work is being 
vigorously prosecuted. This route calls for the construction of 7 or 8 miles, with ample 
breakwaters, at a total cost of $8,000,000 or thereabouts, furnished not by the Govern- 
ment but by private investors. The voyage from Boston to Sandwich is no more 
hazardous than from Boston to Plymouth. Reaching the upper part of Buzzards Bay, 
there is a sheet of water landlocked and protected by a chain of islands from the gales 
which sweep the ocean. From the western outlet of Buzzards Bay the distance to 
Newport and Narragansett Bay is comparatively short and over water not troublesome. 
It may be wise to construct an inland waterway westward to avoid the perils near 
Point Judith. But that is a matter not embraced in your communication. 

In my opinion, it is wiser to await the results of the Cape Cod Canal before seriously 
considering a canal from Hingham or Plymouth to the Taunton River. Fifty million 
dollars can be better expended in other internal improvements. I do not know 
whether it is the intention to make the proposed canal a free waterway, the United 
States assuming its maintenance and operation. If so, the yearly expenditure will 
be large. You speak of three or four railroad bridges, but this is a small number when 
compared with the highway bridges which will be demanded. All the bridges are 
drawbridges and call for much expense in opening and closing, and locks require 
careful treatment. Besides, the canal must be lighted its entire distance; no steamer 
or tug will undertake a run through the canal by compass on a dark night. 

As a commercial proposition, looking at it in a business way, I see no adequate 
return to the commerce of the country from the proposed expenditure. 

I make no mention of the political and military features of the proposed waterway, 
as my opinion would be valueless. 

You must not infer from what I have written that I am in any manner whatever, 
directly or indirectly, interested in the Cape Cod enterprise or in its promoters. A 
closer study of the subject may, of course, modify my opinions. 

Letter of A. Homer Skinner, of Fall River, Mass., dated February 18, 1911. 

In regard to your circular letter dated December 27, 1910, regarding the intracoastal 
waterway on the Atlantic coast, and especially the link between Narragansett Bay 
and Boston Harbor, permit me to state my reasons why I think this link should be 
constructed, and why it should return large and valuable benefits to all of the southern 
and eastern parts of New England, and from a humanitarian standpoint will save the 
large toll of lives the sea annually claims from Point Judith to Boston Bay. 

Now it seems to me that there are two reasons why this Narragansett Bay to Boston 
Bay link of the inland waterways should be built. First, that of safety, as it will save 
the lives of men now lost each year on the outside route between these two points. 
Second, that of saving the long distance of the outside route, instead of taking the short 
and direct line by this proposed canal between these two points. 

Under the first reason permit me to say between the years 1880 and 1903 there were 
1,076 marine disasters between Point Judith and Boston Bay, and 544 were off Cape 
Cod. Now if this canal had been in operation, in all probability most of these disas- 
ters would not have happened. During the early part of this winter a tow of three 
barges, in charge of the Tug Lykens, was lost off Peaked Hills Bars, and 16 men lost 
their lives. If this proposed cacal had been built this disaster could not have hap- 
pened. In January of this year a large fleet of vessels left the Vineyard, bound around 
the Cape, and when off Chatham the wind died out. About 9 o'clock in the evening 
a blizzard came from the northwest, striking the fleet, and six of them were lost Two 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 141 



of them lost their entire crews. Up to the present date there have been 29 lives lost 
by marine disasters off Cape Cod this winter. The average loss of human life each 
year off this point is 30, and over $100,000 value in marine property. Now if this pro- 
posed canal was built, this toll of human life could be saved and also the loss of prop- 
erty. 

Under the second reason, that of saving of time. As time is money, this could come 
under the head of economy. Nearly one-half the distance could be saved from Point 
Judith to Boston by going through this proposed canal; but the greatest time would 
be saved in tugs, barges, and vessels not being obliged to wait at the Vineyard for fa- 
vorable weather to proceed around the Cape, and also the delay in going the other way 
bound to the southward and westward. If this delay could be reduced in dollars it 
would reach an enormous figure. With the exception of two other points, there is more 
commerce passing Point Judith in one year than any other place in the whole world. 
And as this canal would contribute to the economy of commerce on one of the world's 
most frequented highways of ocean travel, it would seem as if this important work 
should be begun with as little delay as possible. 

Transportation by water costs about one-seventh of that by rail. The rate of freight 
from New York to Fall River by rail is 15 cents per 100 pounds, or $3 per ton. By 
water it is 40 cents per ton. The freight from Norfolk, Va., to Fall River by rail is 
22 cents per 100 pounds, or $4.40 per ton. By water it is 60 cents per ton. The 
freight from Jacksonville, Fla., to Fall River by rail is 28 cents per 100 pounds. By 
water it is $1.25 per ton. This being the case, should we not provide every facility 
possible to make our waterways more convenient to our commerce? 

The benefit Boston would have by this canal would be in having its rate of freight 
reduced 10 cents per ton by barges coming through this canal instead of going around 
the Cape. Boston saves 10 cents per ton on 9,000,000 tons of coal used annually, 
which would amount to $900,000 each year, besides saving on other commodities 
which would come through this canal. The points beyond Boston would also save the 
same sum on their coal, which would almost double this amount. 

The benefit Fall River would have by this canal would be in giving to its people 
a connection with the outside freight world by a line separate from the New York, 
New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., which on account of having no competition 
exacts an enormous toll of freight each year from them. The Clyde Line of steamers 
would probably use this canal and probably make Fall River a port of call. About 
400,000 bales of cotton is used in Fall River each year. About 10,000,000 feet of 
southern pine lumber is used in Fall River each year. If the Clyde Line steamers 
make Fall River a port of call, large amounts of these materials would come by them 
and a great amount of freight money saved on the cotton and a much quicker delivery 
on the lumber. I have had steamer shipments of lumber from Jacksonville, Fla., 
and by the present arrangements it has come first to Boston via the Clyde Line and 
then shipped via the New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co. to Fall 
River. The freight by the Clyde Line by water is $6 per 1,000 feet, or six-tenths of 
a cent per 1,000 feet per mile. When it gets in possession of the New York, New 
Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., by rail the charge is $4 per 1,000 feet, or 8 cents per 
1,000 feet per mile. Now, if this canal were built I could get this stock delivered in 
Fall River for $6 per 1,000 feet instead of $10 per 1,000 feet. Besides what Fall 
River would use in cotton and lumber, this same material would come for the 
Providence market, and they use more than double the quantity of lumber Fall 
River uses. If this canal were built, it would save, in my estimation, over $2,000,000 
to the business men of eastern and southern New England each year. 

No doubt industries would be built on the borders of this canal, for with the reduced 
cost of the raw material and the reduced cost of the finished produce which this canal 
would give on account of its water transportation it certainly would attract capital. 

Passenger and light-package freight lines would be established between Providence, 
Fall River, and Boston, and while we now have to pay from $1.50 to $3 per ton freight 
from Fall River to Boston, these steamers running through this proposed canal would 
be able to carry it for at least $1 per ton and make good money in the business. 

As to the type and dimensions of the canal, it would seem to me if a sea-level canal 
could be constructed from Narragansett Bay to Boston Bay with a depth of 25 feet 
and a bottom width of 200 feet, it would serve the purpose to the best advantage. 
If it is not possible to construct a sea-level canal without too great expenditure of 
money, then a lock canal would have to be built with only one lock if possible. 

I am very much interested in this canal, as I can see its very great advantage to 
southern and eastern New England, and trust a favorable report will be made by 
the Board of United States Engineers, so that the work may proceed with as little 
delay as possible. 



142 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Letter of New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., dated January 28, 1911. 

Referring to your letter of December 27, in regard to a proposed canal between 
Boston Harbor and Narragansett Bay: 
The project does not commend itself to our people. 

It is stated that such a waterway would shorten the distance between New York 
and Boston 20 miles over the route through the Cape Cod Canal, now under construc- 
tion. Our belief is that such a waterway as is proposed would not have much, if any, 
influence upon the movement of merchandise traffic to and from New York and the 
territory traversed by the canal, because the service would be slower than now afforded 
by prevailing routes. For the most part merchandise is now loaded at interior Mas- 
sachusetts manufacturing towns in the afternoon and is landed in New York the 
following morning, being substantially express service at freight rates. Such service 
by craft suitable for navigating the canal would be impossible, but would consume 
substantially 24 hours longer time in transit, taking into account early morning deliv- 
ery in New York. 

To effect equally early delivery by the canal route would entail earlier departure 
from the manufacturing point, resulting in the longer time in transit by "taking off" 
at the starting point. Furthermore, only such places could be served as were actually 
upon the shores of the canal, because to reach places located a greater distance than 
could be covered by dray teams would entail the use of the railroad, the rates over 
which plus the handling charges and canal boat charges would be greater than the 
current rates via the present routes. 

Without the aid of a map showing the exact location of the proposed canal, it is 
presumed in a general way that it would not serve more than three or four towns 
between Hingham and Taunton and these would not produce sufficient traffic to sup- 
port a steamboat line to and from New York. Boston-New York traffic would most 
likely seek the Cape Cod Canal route in ocean steamers of the type now plying between 
New York and Boston, in which freight is carried at the present time at rates below 
which boats plying the inland canal route could not go and derive a profit from the 
service. 

It should be borne in mind that a large part of the traffic now moving between 
New York and Boston proper travels by rail in fast trains which make the run in less 
than 10 hours and at rates higher than charged by the present all-water route. It 
is a certainty that this traffic would be unaffected by the proposed canal route. The 
only traffic that might move through the canal would consist of coal, provided it 
were constructed suitably for the passage of tugs towing barges of 3,000 to 5,000 tons 
capacity in strings of from three to six barges. Water-borne coal reaching Boston 
starts from South Atlantic coast ports in the main; the rates are generally low, rang- 
ing from 40 to 85 cents per ton, according to season and volume of tonnage. 

It would be difficult to pass these barges through locks and the operation would 
consume much time. It is not a fair assumption that this traffic could in any manner 
be transferred from the larger carriers to the smaller craft that would naturally ply ; 
the canal; consequently it is inconceivable how the canal boats could reach any of 
this heavy tonnage — not heavy in volume, but classed as "heavy" in transporta- 
tion parlance. Coal originating at New England tide- water points for places located 
on the canal would be affected, but the volume is not large. 

Altogether it does not seem to us that the proposition to construct a canal such as 
described has serious merit . There are so many avenues of transportation at present 
between New York and Boston and interior Massachusetts points that the rates of 
transportation are very low. They could not be materially reduced by carriers using 
the proposed canal route and leave a margin for profit unless such tines were sup- 
ported by Government subsidy. 

Further information received by the commission. 

Project of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association. (A summary of papers 
on the subject with statistics of coastwise commerce.) 

The Atlantic Deeper Waterways Conference (report of proceedings), held at Phila- 
delphia, November 18, 19, and 20, 1907. 

The Atlantic Deeper Waterways Convention, held at Baltimore, November 17, 18, 
and 19, 1908. 

The Atlantic Deeper Waterways Convention, held at Norfolk, November 17, 18, 
19, and 20, 1909. 

Atlantic Deeper Waterways Convention, held at Providence, August 31, September 
1, 2, and 3, 1910. 

Tabulated Statement Relating to International Waterways Improved by the United 
States Government, January 1, 1910. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 143 



Canal Connecting the Rhine and the Elbe Rivers, Germany (copy of an act for the 
construction of a navigable canal from the Rhine to the Elbe, and report on project, 
description, and tables of cost, etc., of canals and canalized rivers in Germany), Docu- 
ment No. 8, July 21, 1909. 

The Port of Hamberg and the Lower Elbe (letter from the Chief of Engineers, United 
States Army, inclosing report of Maj. F. A. Mahan, Corps of Engineers, United States 
Army, retired), Document No. 5, 1909. 

Rivers of China, Korea, and the Russian Far East (letter from Hon. Willard D. 
Straight, consul general of the United States at Mukden, China, inclosing memoran- 
dum on the navigation of the rivers of China, Korea, and the Russian far east), Docu- 
ment No. 3, 1909. 

Regarding Practicability of Storage Reservoirs to Prevent Floods and to Benefit 
Navigation on the Ohio and Other Rivers of the United States, Document No. 14. 
January, 1910. 

Questions for Consular Officers in Europe, to Follow Letter from the State Depart- 
ment, Document No. 2, 1909. 

The Waterways of the United States; Actual Expenditures and Results to Naviga- 
tion and Commerce, Document No. 15, March, 1910. 

An Act to Provide for the Repair, Maintenance, and Preservation of Public Works 
on Rivers and Harbors, and for Other Purposes, Public, No. 317. 

The Royal Commission on Canals and Waterways (summary of the report of the 
Royal Commission on Canals and Waterways of Great Britain, by Mr. Woodbury 
Pulsifer, secretary Committee on Commerce, United States Senate), Document No. 
9, July 24, 1909. 

Questions Showing the Scope of the Work of the National Waterways Commission, 
Including Inquiries Transmitted to Consular and Engineer Officers of the United 
States (questions to be considered by the subcommittees of the National Waterways 
Commission), Document No. 6, 1909. 

Canals and Navigable Rivers in the District of Berlin, Germany (letter from Hon. 
Frank H. Mason, consul general, Berlin, Germany, to the Assistant Secretary of State, 
Department of State ; Washington, D. C, transmitting report on the canals and navi- 
gable rivers in the district of Berlin), Document No. 1, 1909. 

Preliminary Report of the Inland Waterways Commission, Document No. 325, 1908. 

European Waterways (reports of consular officers of the United States, located in 
Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands, on river and 
harbor improvements in their respective districts), Document No. 7, July 20, 1909. 

A Traffic History of the Mississippi River System, Document No. 11, December, 
1909. 

Railway Freight Rates Inland Waterways and Canals in France, Document No. 16, 
1910. 

Inland Waterways and Canals and Railway Rates of the United Kingdom, Docu- 
ment No. 17, 1910. 

Railway Freight Rates Inland Waterways and Canals in Holland, Document No. 

18, 1910. 

Railway Freight Rates, Inland Waterways and Canals of Germany, Document No. 

19, 1911. 

Letter of Col. Abbot, April 17, 1911, giving a description of the proposed canal. 

Extract from a letter from George S. Smith, president of the Boston Chamber of Commerce, 

dated April 18, 1911. 

I was sorry not to have an opportunity the other day to explain to you and the 
other members of the commission why the chamber is unable to give its indorsement 
to the construction of the proposed canal across Massachusetts, from Fall River through 
Taunton. 

The chamber is at all times anxious and zealous for the advancement and upbuild- 
ing of New England, and if it felt that the facts justified its doing so nothing would 
give the officers and members of the chamber more pleasure than to indorse and 
actively support this project; but the chamber's committee have been entirely unable 
to find any grounds upon which the construction of the canal could be recommended 
and urged. 

Probably it will be impossible to expend $50,000,000 or $60,000,000 for any purpose 
which would not result in some benefit; but we feet that the real question is whether 
these advantages and benefits are sufficient to warrant the expenditure of this large 
sum, also whether, if the United States Government can afford to spend this amount 
of money for New England, it will be of greater benefit to Massachusetts and New 
England if spent for this particular purpose than for other purposes. 



144 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, 2ST. 



City of Fall River, Mass., 

Executive Departmemt, 

April 24, 1911. 

Massachusetts Inland Waterways Commission. 

Dear Sirs: Referring to the matter of inland waterways, would say that I believe 
it to be the almost unanimous opinion of the citizens of Fall River that the proposed 
Government ship canal between Narragansett Bay and Boston Harbor will be of the 
greatest benefit to our industries, and I heartily record my indorsement to the same. 
Yours, respectfully, 

Thomas F. Higgins, 
Mayor of the City of Fall River, Mass. 



City op Fall River, Mass., 

City Clerk Department, 

In Board of Aldermen, 

February 20, 1911. 

Resolved, That this board, realizing the great benefit this city will receive should 
the proposed Fall River to Boston canal become an actual fact, record itself as favoring 
the proposed legislation relative to inland waterways. 

In Board of Aldermen, February 20, 1911. 

Adopted. 

John Crowther, City Clerk. 

A true copy. 
Attest: 

[seal.] John Crowther, City Clerk. 

April 24, 1911. 

The president of the Massachusetts State Board of Trade communicated the follow- 
ing resolution adopted at a meeting of the executive council held in Boston March 
16, 1911: 

"That the committee on statistics and information be requested to communicate 
with the affiliated organizations, and endeavor to awaken a lively interest in the 
question of United States waterway improvements and procure for Col. Abbot the 
information desired by him to the end that Massachusetts may not be reported as 
indifferent to this great project." 

The following information was obtained through personal inquiry by Mr. Bernard 
J. Roth well, of the commission: 

L. K. Thurlow (of Crowell & Thurlow). 

Capt. Peter Crowell (of Crowell & Thurlow). 

William H. Randall (of John S. Emery & Co.). 

Capt. Coombs (with John S. Emery & Co.). 

Capt. John G. Crowley. 

These vessel owners and operators were all asked for their views as to the extent to 
which the proposed Fall River-Hingham canal would be used by sailing vessels, 
steamers, or tows, and without exception their opinions ranged from "very little 
use" to "no use at all." 

They are of the opinion that in bad weather it would be risky for steamers; that the 
slow speed and use of locks would permit no saving in time; that sailing vessels would 
have to be towed; that the towage in the case of coal vessels would be an important 
percentage of the entire freight; that barges could not be towed in procession, but 
would probably have to be towed singly, certainly not more than two at a time; that 
in fair weather steamers would as soon go outside and sailing vessels would preferably, 
rather than pay any towage; that in bad weather sailing vessels going south would not 
leave Boston; that coming north there would be about as much risk in approaching 
the entrance to the canal as in keeping well out to sea around the cape; that vessels 
from southern ports such as Baltimore, Newport News, and Philadelphia would not 
come through the Vineyard but would keep outside of Nantucket, so that the canal 
would not be in their regular course; that the canal would freeze up and that the 
entrance would be so piled with floating ice in winter that it could not be entered. 

It was stated that 25 feet, of water would not peimit of a vessel of over 22^ to 23 feet 
passing through. 

Mr. Ransom B. Fuller, president of the Boston Insurance Co., stated that insurance 
rates for outside route are already extremely low and that the difference via either the 
Cape Cod Canal or the proposed Fall River-Hingham Canal might possibly be 20 per 
cent less than by the outside route around Cape Cod. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 145 



Mr. Charles Skentelbery, manager New England Coal & Coke Co. fleet, stated that 
in the event of construction of the proposed canal not one of the vessels of their fleet 
would ever use it; that they could not afford to do so because of the risk of navigation 
and the slow speed which would be necessary, delays at locks, etc., that they would 
invariably choose the outside route. He stated the tendency in coal carrying to be 
toward steamers rather than sailing craft; that he believed the only use that would be 
made of the canal would be by barges or special canal boats; that he did not believe 
such use either to or from the towns en route or as a through artery of transportation 
would justify any such expenditure as this project calls for. 

S. R. Crowell, ship broker and vessel owner, Cunard Building, vessel broker and 
operator of coastwise coal-carrying schooners, stated that in his judgment no seagoing 
vessel operated by her own steam or sail would ever use such a canal, as the expense 
of towing through the canal would absorb so large a percentage of the through rate as 
to make the outside route decidedly preferable. He believes the delays incident to fog 
or contrary winds off the cape no greater than would be likely to prevail through 
similar cause or ice obstruction at the entrance to the canal, even if the canal itself 
could be kept open, which he doubted. 

Capt. John M. Ward, of Marblehead, formerly treasurer of the Boston Theater, and 
now operating three or four coastwise coal-carrying schooners, expressed the same 
belief even more strongly. 

Rogers & Webb, shipowners and vessel brokers, Cunard Building, operating coal- 
carrying three and four masted schooners, did not believe the canal would be of any 
practical use to seagoing self-propelled vessels, either steam or sail, and thought there 
could be no possible advantage resulting from the use of the canal which would justify 
the cost of construction or of maintenance. 

J. Frank Wellington, of the Wellington- W 7 ilde Coal Co., stated that there was possi- 
bility that barges might be towed through the canal to some extent if they could be 
towed tandem or abreast; that he did not believe the canal would be used by sailing 
craft except in a long continuous spell of bad weather because of the cost of towage, 
and that it would not in any event be used by steamers; that he believed the Cape 
Cod Ship Canal now under construction would provide any necessary means of avoid- 
ing Cape Cod in bad weather; he furthermore believed from his experience at his 
wharves on the Charles River and in regard to keeping the channel open there since 
the construction of the dam, that it would be impossible to keep such a canal open 
during the winter months; that a tug is constantly employed 24 hours in the day 
moving up and down the Charles River during extreme winter weather; even if the 
ice were broken up in the canal it would have no place to float off because of there 
being no material current and therefore that it would pile up in the canal so as to 
obstruct navigation. 

R. R. Freeman, ship broker, 95 Commercial Street, was chairman of house com- 
mittee on harbor and public lands in 1904 and 1905. He stated that in his judgment 
no type of vessels now carrying coal or lumber between southern ports and Boston 
would use the proposed canal under any circumstances; steamers would not bother 
with it as they would gain no time; sailing vessels could not pay the towing charges; 
barges could not safely be towed more than one at a time; sailing vessels are only 
caught twice, at the outside three times a year, so as to be delayed badly in going 
around the cape. In his opinion there would be absolutely no warrant for such an 
expenditure for construction or upkeep as this canal would involve. 

Capt. John Ross, pilot commissioner, is strongly in favor of the proposed canal and 
believes it would be used by practically all craft. He insists, however, that the canal 
should not be less than 30 feet deep. 

George Wooley, connected with the Commercial Tow Boat Co., believed vessels of 
all classes would go through the canal, and believed the use of it and the advantage 
to the State would justify the investment. He believed that vessels could be towed 
in tandem three behind a tug, which is contrary to the opinion of every other vessel 
man interviewed. 

Mr. A. Homer Skinner, of the commission, submitted the following questions to 
parties employed in navigation of vessels and obtained the following answers: 

In relation to the Government ship canal from Boston Bay at Hingham to Narragan- 
sett Bay at Fall River with a depth of 25 feet and a bottom width of 200 feet and a 
top width of about 300 feet, what are your answers as an experienced mariner to the 
following questions: 

1. Question. Would the coastwise steamers of less than 23-foot draft running to 
and from Boston through Vineyard Sound use the canal? 
J. H. Diehl, master, steamship City of Macon, Ocean Steamship Co.: All of them. 
T. I. Winsor, Boston Towboat Co.: I think so. 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 10 



146 INTKACOASTAL WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOKT, N. C. 



V. Z. Ryan, pilot and second officer, steamship Gloucester, Merchant & Miners 
Transportation Co. : All of them. 

J. A. Crocker, pilot and second officer, steamship Indian, Merchant & Miners 
Transportation Co.: All of them. 

Bruno E. Webber, pilot, steamship Macon, Ocean Steamship Co.: Probably all 
coastwise steamers. 

A. H. Brooks, pilot and second officer, steamship Juniata, Merchant & Miners 
Transportation Co.: They would, I am sure. 

2. Question. What proportion of towboat and barge traffic that runs through Vine- 
yard Sound would use the canal? 

J. H. Diehl, master, steamship City of Macon, Ocean Steamship Co.: Probably all of 
them would use it. 

T. I. Winsor, Boston Towboat Co.: All in bad weather; many at all times. 

V. Z. Ryan, pilot and second officer, steamship Gloucester, Merchant & Miners 
Transportation Co. : Probably all of them. 

J. P. McKimmon, master tug Charles Mann, and Felix Guilmet, master tug Chas. T r 
Gallagher, of the Commercial Towboat Co. : All the Commercial Towboat Co. represents. 

James Woolley, treasurer the Commercial Towboat Co. : All the Commercial Towboat 
Co. represents. 

3. Question. Would sailing vessels under 23-foot draft use the canal; and if so, under 
what circumstances? 

J. H. Diehl, master, steamship City of Macon, Ocean Steamship Co.: Unfavorable 
and stormy weather. 

T. I. Winsor, Boston Towboat Co.: Can not say. 

A public hearing by the commission was given on Tuesday, April 11, 1911, at 
10.30 a. m. at the State House. Notice of the hearing was given by public advertise- 
ment and press notices and by 1,000 circulars letters sent to steamship companies, 
towboat companies, vessel owners, brokers, cities, and towns along the routes of the 
proposed canal, executives of the New England States, railroad companies, trolley 
companies, etc. 

The following is a condensed summary of the evidence presented to the commission : 

Statement of James E. Lewis, of Taunton. 

Taunton is the laigest city on the proposed line of Atlantic deeper waterways and. 
is probably more interested than any other point on the coast on all the proposed lines 
of canals. 

Under Col. Abbot's proposed plan the first lock would be within a mile and a half 
of the center of Taunton and within half a mile of the business section where the ranges 
and stoves are made. 

Statement of Capt. John W. Hammond, of Taunton. 

I have been in the transportation business a little over 25 years. I would like to 
say that the water port of Taunton, known as Weir, is where most of the industries 
of iron, all the coal wharves, and most of the lumber wharves are situated, and this 
river runs right through the city, within the distance from city hall which Mr. Lewis 
has already stated. 

There are now taken to Taunton about 100,000 tons of coal, of which 75,000 tons are 
carried by water. About 30,000 tons of iron and 10,000 tons of lumber, nearly all of 
which comes by rail. This lumber which comes by rail pays an excess freight from 
Fall River into New Bedford, as against Taunton. The lumber that comes to Fall 
River and New Bedford through Taunton is delivered cheaper to those other cities 
than to Taunton because the other cities have competition by water, and they meet 
the competitive water rate. The lumber comes from both South and East. 

In addition to our little business on the Taunton River we move some 45,000 to 
60,000 tons of coal to Boston and ports in its vicinicy around the cape which I feel con- 
fident we should move through the canal, utilizing the canal for all our tonnage. 
Under the present conditions about 40 per cent of the time is lost on account of the 
winter weather in going around the cape, and that could be saved if we had this canal. 

I myself am not in favor of 17 feet or 25 feet depth of canal. I would suggest a com- 
promise of 22 feet; 17 feet is not adequate, and it does not seem necessary for a 25-foot 
canal. The reason is that most vessels are being built to 20-foot draft. I favor a com- 
promise canal with a little less draft, a little less than the initial cost, and a little less 
cost of maintenance to meet the conditions equally well. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 147 



There is a lot of package freight that would come by packages and a good deal of 
grain would come up by water. While the canal would not, I understand, go near 
enough to Brockton to be within carting distance, it is only a matter of a email side 
canal to go up there. I do not advocate that the canal go to Plymouth. They have 
the same conditions there that you have in Cape Cod Bay, but not quite so bad, but, 
as I said, the chief trouble now in moving vessels is the weather conditions, and those 
would be largely eliminated if the canal touched Boston. 

1 think the canal would nearly parallel the railroads, and I can see why the railroads 
would rather object to the canal going through. Nevertheless, it would in one item 
alone, freight from Fall River to Taunton, probably decrease the cost of moving said 
freight from 30 to 40 cents a ton. Freight from Fall River to Taunton, water-borne 
freight, could be taken up for 10 cents from Fall River to Taunton. 

There is all kind of freight between Fall River and Taunton, and we send all-rail 
coal that we discharge in Fall River; we send it through to Brockton and all up through, 
until it can meet the freight rate from Boston south. We ship from Fall River alone, I 
think, some 30,000 or 40,000 tons by rail. 

Regarding the conditions in winter between Taunton and Fall River and have 
had only one case of trouble from ice in three years, and that was winter before last, 
and then it was only because the new bridge could not be opened and we could not 
run vessels up there and the river closed in. After we got the river opened again we 
kept it open through the rest of the winter. 

We move about 80,000 tons of coal a month with our own vessels, and in addition 
to that the Lehigh Coal Co. has about 15,000 more a month. It is from Norfolk, 
Newport News, Philadelphia, and New York to Massachusetts only. 

Vessels bound around Cape Cod from Newport News, Norfolk, and New York, 
bound to Salem and other distributing points, lose 40 per cent of time in the winter 
months — that is to say, that nearly one-half of the time is wasted for sea-going barges 
in tow. Not half of the time taken to go around Cape Cod, but half of the time in the 
month. For instance, if the month comprises 100 per cent of the time, she loses 40 
per cent of the time waiting. 

Judging from experience and from our own transportation and from the transporta- 
tion that is now being built 17 feet is too shallow for a barge canal. Barges for towing 
purposes — I would not consider schooners, as I think they would not use the canal. 
A 22-foot canal suitable for tugs and barges would be suitable for schooners and any 
steamships on our coasts can go through it. 

We have no coastwise ships except some big coal-trading ships that are run now, 
and they draw sometimes 2G or 27 feet, and there is less than 1 per cent of the tonnage 
that would be accommodated in a 25-foot canal that would not be accommodated 
in 22 feet. Some of the larger ships, the Merchants & Miners, and all of these big 
colliers that have been built, are drawing 26 or 27 feet of water and could not go 
through. They must have 1 or 2 feet below the keel, so that they won't strike the 
bottom. 

My idea of the bottom width of the canal was 200 feet, and 22 feet deep. Would 
use it towing tandem, in tows, through the canal. That would leave a proper turnout 
for vessels going the other way, so that vessels could use that canal both ways at the 
same time. One hundred and twenty-five feet would be hardly enough. I think 
you could tow three, the regular ship tow. 

I think you could save 25 per cent of the time, in all weathers, through such a canal 
from Narragansett Bay to Boston, or a saving of 5 cents a ton. We figure that one 
of our tugs is worth $150 to $175 a day. In ordinary weather we would save nearly 
a day, and in the winter time we should say five or six days or 10 days; possibly a 
month. The ordinary tug with three barges would cost $250 to lay up a day. The 
consumer suffers this loss; that is, it is charged up to the consumer in the final analysis. 

If we could go through the canal to Fall River we could go through the Sound and 
then south under all weathers. Forty days' time out of 100 are lost during the winter 
because it is necessary to round Cape Cod, and I think this loss of time could be saved 
by this canal. 

We would expect ice to form in the canal, but it would be broken up by towboats. 
Towboats are great ice breakers. The ice would be broken up like porridge and 
crowded right to the shores. It would not interfere with navigation. The speed in 
the canal will be 4 or 5 miles. 

Seventy-six vessels are running to Taunton all the time. I have had it for two 
weeks that we have taken one up and one down each day, and then we have intervals 
of no transportation, because there is nothing there to take up. 

If we could land coal at Taunton, the rate to Brockton or the rate to Middleboro 
or Bridgewater, or any of those places in there, would be lower. A canal up to Taunton 
would lower the cost or price of soft coal to Taunton and would have a tendency to 
lower the price into Boston. 



148 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



The saving in construction of light barges, if we were assured we could use this 
canal, would be about 50 per cent. It costs about $20.50 a ton to build a seagoing 
vessel, and it costs about $9 or $10 a ton to build this class of box barge. 

Sailing vessels, moving at sea by their own sail power, would go through the canal 
if they saw fit to make that port. If they made Newport for a harbor they would 
tow through to Boston. They are not building any smaller sailing vessels. 

I do not think there would be any small sailing vessels left at the time this canal 
could be completed. The sailing vessels that will be left will be large and draw 24 
feet and upward. All the Merchants & Miners coastwise steamers could go through. 
The large bulk of coal transportation is by barges. Perhaps 20 per cent of it is now 
taken in sailing vessels. Coal is largely carried by towing. 

I can not conceive of any weather that would hardly stop you from entering this 
canal unless it was a fog, so that you could not see the approaches. Wind and storm 
would not stop you from entering that canal. If it comes out at Hingham and goes 
in from Fall River and you are in those ports it would not delay you more than 1 
per cent. 

It seems feasible to me to dig a small canal up to Brockton from the main canal. 
It could be a lock canal for that matter, and then you could put an electrical connec- 
tion in there and run freight right up there overland. 

Mr. Lewis. I would like to say that the railroad rates on coal from Fall River to 
Taunton is 60 cents a ton. I would like to ask Mr. Hammond what it is by water? 
Mr. Hammond. We charge 20 cents. 

Statement of Mr. Clinton B. Sanders, of Taunton. 

We receive between 300 and 400 cars of lumber a year. If we had a canal at least 
half would come by water. The rate from New Bedford and Fall River is 15 cents 
by rail, and to Taunton it is 19 cents, because we are an inland town. If we had a 
canal we would be a seaport town, and we would save from $1 to $1.60 on all our 
lumber per thousand feet. A canal to Taunton, deepening the Taunton River, would 
put us on the seacoast, the same as a through canal. It would save us a railroad 
freight of $1 to $1.50. 

We would get our lumber from Maine and Nova Scotia by water if we could have a 
canal to come that way, from the Boston side, and that would save us $2.40. Twenty 
cents more for handling, and altogether $2.65. 

The total amount of lumber consumed in Taunton in one year is 10,000,000 feet, so 
the maximum saving would be over $20,000. 

There is a large consumption of iron in Taunton. That would use the canal to 
advantage. The population of Taunton is about 35,000 now. We were about 32,000 
10 years ago. 

We truck our lumber to Middleboro, Attleboro, and Brockton, and most of it is 
water-borne lumber. Brockton would save on its lumber by having it come to 
Taunton. 

Statement of Mr. Charles A. Ufford, of Boston. 

What we want is to get this line through from New York. We are in the manufac- 
turing business and ship by the Fall River line. We do not ship a great deal, but 
we have a ton of paper and things like that. 

Statement of Mr. A. E. Robbins, treasurer Corr Manufacturing Co., of Taunton. 

In getting material we have great difficulty with the railroads in getting service. 
The canal would serve us perfectly. It would develop a section of the country that 
lies dormant now and has possibilities. To my mind it is a very satisfactory location 
for any large manufacturing enterprise. It would save us $4,000 or $5,000 a year. 
The assessed overcharge and very complicated arrangements and limitations in load- 
ing freights add materially to our freight charges. There would be a saving on cotton 
in and cloth out, and coal and all other supplies which we use in large volume. In 
addition to the barge transportation, as the scheme works out now, we have to pay 
the haulage charge. In the case of a canal we could unload our own supplies at our 
place. 

Statement of D. Gardner O'Keefe, Esq., City Solicitor of Taunton. 

In my opinion the canal which is laid out on this map which appears before us 
here is the only feasible project of this kind, the canal from Hingham to Taunton, 
200 feet wide at the bottom and 25 feet deep at the maximum expense. If that canal 
were to run into Plymouth Harbor, so called, it would be impracticable. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 149 



It is a notable enterprise which should be encouraged. It will not only benefit 
the locality through which it runs, but it will be a godsend to Taunton. There are 
industries down there now practically laying dormant for the reason that they are 
unable to compete with industries in the South. The iron and lumber and coal have 
to be shipped up there at increased rates. 

If that canal would save human life it would be well worth $100,000,000. 

It is the inland waterways in my opinion that need building up. The hope of the 
future bulk transportation is at lower cost. I do not think that canal would be so 
circuitous as to be dangerous for towing. The canal ought to show a saving of at least 
$3,000,000 a year to justify its construction. 

Statement of Mr. Frank M. Chase, chairman of the Bristol County Commissioners. 

I am chairman of the county commissioners of Bristol County, and they are all in 
favor of this proposition before your commission. It would benefit the county a great 
deal. I feel now as though something was about to be consummated. 

Statement of Mr. Edmond Cote, of Fall River. 

I am here to represent the Merchants Association of Fall River, which passed a 
vote urging the canal as proposed on the map at my right. They believe it will pro- 
mote the industries of Fall River. It will facilitate freight transportation between 
Fall River and the South, and between the South and Boston. This is the principal 
reason why this canal should be built. I do not believe that this canal could be built 
for passenger purposes and be a paying institution, because it is essential for freight 
accommodation. If this canal is built by the Government it will also promote a great 
many manufactories all along the line. It would help to increase the manufacturers' 
business all over Massachusetts. 

I believe that the investment of sixty or more million dollars is warranted by the 
increased business which Massachusetts would get. I believe that the increase in 
business along the line will guarantee a saving of more than the interest on the invest- 
ment. 

The population of Fall River is 125,000. It has increased 15,000 in the last 10 years. 
The trade between Boston and Fall River would be increased if the canal were built. 
I think manufacturers would try to build around this canal. 

Statement of Mr. B. R. Acornley, of Fall River. 

I represent the Fall River Trade Industrial Association, and desire to have this 
canal go through, not only from the business standpoint, but from the standpoint of 
the lives that have been sacrificed in the past and the saving of life. We have loss 
of life around the cape which has been exceedingly great, and I think the canal would 
prevent that. I think the amount of money the Government might invest in this 
canal would be a good investment. 

Statement of Alderman Charles A. Macdonald, of Fall River. 

I am in favor of the canal. I consider that the arguments for life-saving are very 
strong. 

Statement of Mr. Robert A. Dean, of Fall River. 

This canal going through there is going to give us a lower freight rate, which will 
insure for us fair treatment by the railroad. A 5 per cent return on $60,000,000 strikes 
me as not at all unreasonable, I think I can supply some figures to show where they 
will get a considerable part of it right here in Fall River. 

Statement of Mr. 67. W. Cook, of Haverhill. 

I would advocate having a canal deep enough to take the deepest warships, 30 to 
35 feet deep. 

Statement of Senator Charles S. Chase, of Dighton. 

I think it is a project that would be highly beneficial to the shipping, and not only 
to the Commonwealth but to fhe whole country. The iron industry has been driven 
out of business in the last 25 years owing to competition in the other parts of the coun- 
try. If the canal were built, it would develop the whole country about Dighton. 



150 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Statement of Mr. Edward. L. Burwell, of Winchester. 

Ships at Providence, if they were going to Liverpool, I do not think would use 
this canal, but if we had a terminal here at Hingham I think vessels from England 
and France and other parts of the world will bring freight here and deposit it at this 
terminal, and that there would then be facilities for transshipping it to other ports. 
The only feasible canal is a canal that enters Boston Harbor. 



CONCLUSIONS. 

How to cooperate. 

The act of Congress authorizing the surveys for the Boston-Narragansett Bay por- 
tion of the intracoastal waterways system specified a depth of 25 feet, or such lesser 
depth as may be found sufficient for commercial, naval, or military purposes. The 
Army engineers have, therefore, in preparing their surveys made also estimates for 
canals of 18 feet depth, and their estimates are contained in the following table: 



Description. 



Depth of water. 



18 feet. 



Lock canal (35-foot summit, bottom width 200 feet): 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Hingham Harbor. 
Cost of annual maintenance capitalized at 4 per cent , 

Total cost , 

Lock canal (35-foot summit, bottom width 125 feet): 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Hingham Harbor. 
Cost of annual maintenance capitalized at 4 per cent 

Total cost 

Lock canal (20-foot summit, bottom width 200 feet): 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 
Cost of annual maintenance capitalized at 4 per cent 

Total cost 

Lock canal (20-foot summit, bottom width 125 feet) : 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 
Cost of annual maintenance capitalized at 4 per cent 

Total cost 

Sea-level canal (bottom width 200 feet) : 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 
Cost of annual maintenance capitalized at 4 per cent 

Total cost 

Sea-level canal (bottom width 125 feet): 

Cost of construction, Taunton River to Plymouth Harbor 
Cost of annual maintenance capitalized at 4 per cent 

Total cost 



$29,590,000 
20,178,000 



49,768,000 



24,955,000 
20, 178,000 



45,133,000 



20,570,000 
14,035,000 



34,605,000 



17,453,000 
14,035,000 



31,488,000 



35,696,000 
11,035,000 



46,731,000 



28, 429,000 
11,035,000 



39,464,000 



Note. — All river and harbor sections to have a bottom width of 300 feet. 



The cost of an 18-foot canal over the Taunton-Hingham route of 200 feet bottom 
width is $29,590,000 as compared with $40,047,000 for the 25-foot depth. The com- 
mission finds that 18 feet depth would be insufficient for a modern coal-barge traffic 
and would not constitute a ship canal, to which its consideration was limited by the 
resolve, and therefore have limited their consideration and conclusions to canals of 
25 feet depth and 200 feet bottom width. 

The resolve invites the commission to consider and report in what manner the Com- 
monwealth of Massachusetts may best cooperate with the Federal Government in the 
construction of a free ship canal to be free and open to the commerce of the world, 
without tolls or charges for the passage of freight. 

The commission understands that the project anticipates the construction of the canal 
by the United States Government and that the United States will operate and maintain 
the canal at its own expense, and that the question is, How may the State of Massachu- 
setts best cooperate with the Federal Government to bring about this state of affairs? 



INTRACOASTAL WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 151 



The commission is of the opinion that cooperation with the Federal Government can 
only take effect by sharing in some manner in the cost of the construction and in the sup- 
plying by the State of such facilities in the way of terminals, both at the ends of the 
canal and at intermediate points, as will make the canal useful and convenient for 
the shipment and receipt of vessels and freight. The State of New Jersey has, by the 
act of the legislature and approved by the governor, obligated itself to the expenditure 
of $500,000 to provide and convey to the United States a right of way for the canal proj- 
ect as a part of the intracoastal system from the Delaware River to the Raritan River. 
The engineers estimate the cost of the 9,000 acres of land required for the Taunton- 
Hingham route and the cost of land damages and damages to water privileges at 
$900,000. It appears to the commission just and fair, in view of the magnitude of the 
project, that if construction is determined the State should contribute the right of way. 
The commission believes that to realize the expectations of the advocates of the intra- 
coastal system a large portion of the traffic of the canal must be in barges towed or 
self-propelled, and to make this traffic convenient and economical for local and through 
service it will be necessary to provide special piers, storage, and handling appliances, 
both at Fall River and at the Boston Harbor terminals of the canal, and that it will be 
necessary to provide cut-outs, piers, storage and handling appliances at such inter- 
mediate points in the canal as Dighton, Taunton, the nearest points to Brockton and 
Bridgewater, and possibly at some other points. These facilities should be contributed 
by the State, and they will cost no less than $1,000,000. 

The above is the commission's conclusion as to the manner in which the Common- 
wealth of Massachusetts may best cooperate with the Federal Government. 

The resolve also invites the commission to consider how best the Commonwealth 
may cooperate with other States along the Atlantic seaboard, or especially with Rhode 
Island, m the development of these inland waterways. The commission finds that 
cooperation with the other States would comprise: 

First. Taking part in such congresses and waterway conventions as may be held 
to consider the subject of waterways, in appearance before national commissions and 
committees of Congress having the subject under consideration, in correspondence 
with the authorities of the other States with reference to the above matters. These 
duties can be performed by the Massachusetts State Harbor and Land Commission. 

Second. Instructions by the legislature to its Senators and Representatives in Con- 
gress to cooperate with those from other States with reference to the intracoastal 
waterways. 

THE VALUE OF A SHIP CANAL TO THE STATE. 

The resolve invites the commission to consider the value of such a canal to the State 
and its inhabitants in the development of industries, the reduction in the cost of 
handling raw material and manufactured products or otherwise, and the benefit to 
transportation generally along the Atlantic coast. 

The conditions which justify the construction of ship canals are very farily set forth 
in the preliminary report of the United States National Waterways Commission, of 
which Senator Theodore E. Burton is chairman, and Senator J. H. Gallinger, vice 
chairman, Senate Document No. 30 (61st Cong., 2d sess.,)from which we quote as 
follows: 

"The commission has had under consideration the question of the construction of arti- 
ficial canals adapted to the passage of seagoing ships. An examination of this subject 
has led to the conclusion that this class of waterways is only profitable under certain 
well-defined conditions, of which the following are the best illustrations: 

' ' First. Canals connecting navigable waters located near to each other, between which 
large traffic would naturally exist, except for rapids, a barrier readily overcome, or the 
existence of a comparatively narrow strip of land. The Sault Ste. Marie Canal, con- 
necting Lakes Superior and Huron, is perhaps the best example. This canal, 1.6 
miles in length and constructed at a cost of about $9, 300, 000, renders the almost un- 
limited resources tributary to Lake Superior available to the other lakes and provides 
for a return commerce considerably less in volume. Other illustrations are the Wel- 
land Canal, 26| miles in length, with 26 locks, connecting Lakes Erie and Ontario, 
and the Lachine Canal, constructed for the purpose of obviating rapids in the St. 
Lawrence River. 

" Second. Comparatively short canals, which save a very great sailing distance, such 
as the Suez Canal, 87 miles in length, which furnishes a substitute for the voyage around 
Cape of Good Hope and saves in the sailing distance from Northern and Western 
Europe to Calcutta 3,700 miles, and to Hongkong, by the Straits of Sunda, 3,300 miles. 
Also the proposed Panama Canal, 49 miles in length, which obviates a voyage around 
Cape Horn, and saves in the sailing distance from New York to San Francisco more than 
8,000 miles. Another illustration is the Kaiser- Wilhelm Canal, 53 miles in length, 



152 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



which, though constructed primarily for military purposes, is largely used for commerce, 
and saves in distance for vessels bound from the English Channel to the Baltic about 
200 miles. 

' 1 Third. Canals from the sea to large cities situated not far from the coast, where com- 
munities have grown to large size and become great producers or consumers of freight 
without connection with the ocean. In these cases, with increased commercial and 
manufacturing importance, it has become a practical necessity to establish communi- 
cation with the sea. The best illustration of this class is the Manchester Canal. 35A 
miles in length, with a least depth of 28 feet. The canals in Belgium, from the North 
Sea to Bruges, to Ghent, and to Brussels, are also good examples of this class. 

"The reasons for the disadvantages of canals as compared with natural waterways 
are obvious. In a narrow channel a boat moves with much less speed and with far 
greater difficulty and danger than in a natural waterway where there is sufficient sea 
room. Since the speed of the slowest boat determines the speed of all, it is not proba- 
ble that any time could be gained by using a canal unless the distance saved were very 
considerable. Also, there is the constant danger that in the handling of a large vessel, 
which is not adapted for navigation in a narrow channel, it will strike against the 
bank or works of construction and not only incur delay but also serious damage. This 
possibility increases the cost of insurance. It is conceivable, however, that with 
improved methods of handling vessels this advantage might be somewhat lessened. 
It should be added in this connection that persons familiar with navigation have 
stated, in answer to inquiries on this subject, that even if canals of deep draft should 
be constructed on certain proposed routes in this country and were entirely free from 
tolls or similar charges, large vessels would make no use of them, preferring to go 
where there is greater sea room. Ocean-going boats are so expensive in first cost and 
daily operation that the profits of a whole trip may be consumed by a few days' extra 
delay. Moreover, the expense per ton of carrying capacity is much greater for an 
ocean-going boat than for one used in interior waters. The model, also, and the 
method of handling is different. This difference in cost tends to neutralize any advan- 
tage gained in the use of artificial channels by ocean-going boats." 

The value of a ship canal from Boston Harbor to Narragansett Bay, as now sur- 
veyed by the Army engineers and as herein described, can only be estimated by con- 
sideration of the following questions: 

1. How much of the existing seagoing commerce said to pass eastward through the 
Vineyard Sound annually to the amount of 25,000,000 tone would use the canal? 

2. What would be a corresponding reduction in the cost of freight? 

3. How much of the loss of life and property annually occurring to the seagoing 
traffic around Cape Cod would be saved? 

4. How much new commerce would originate from the intracoastal waterways 
system? 

5. How much benefit would accrue to industries located on or near the route of the 
proposed canal? 

6. How much industrial development might result on or near the route of the pro- 
posed canal? 

7. What traffic the canal might acquire in distribution and collection of the future 
ocean commerce of Boston? 

The answers to all these questions must be largely conjectural and none of them 
admit of definite determination. 

In attempting any expression in regard to them the commission calls attention to the 
very short time available for its consideration of this important subject. The commis- 
sion was organized on April 3 and it is required by the resolve to report in print to the 
general court on or before May 1, 1911. 

The commission under these circumstances can hardly hope to do more than set 
forth fairly and clearly what the project of a Boston-Naragansett Bay Canal consists of 
and what it finds to be the present attitude of the public in regard to it. 

From the information before us, all of which has been referred to in this report, we 
find: 

1. It is doubtful as to what extent seagoing steamers, both cargo and combined cargo 
and passenger vessels in the coastwise trade, would use the canal. 

2. Sailing vessels would not use this canal under ordinary weather conditions and 
on account of the cost of towage would not use it except under extraordinary circum- 
stances. 

3. It is probable that a fair proportion of the present coal barge traffic around the 
cape would use the canal. 

4. The possible saving on coal freight to Boston harbor would not exceed 5 cents per 
ton on possibly 4,000,000 tons. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 153 



5. If sailing vessels will not use the canal and only a portion of the barge traffic will 
use it, a part only of the loss of life and property incurred in navigation around Cape 
Cod would be saved by the construction of the canal. 

6. It is probable that there would be some coal brought to Boston in box or other 
cheap barges which can not now take the outside route. There would be a saving in 
freight on this traffic. 

7. There would be some benefit to local industries and inhabitants of towns on or 
near the route of the canal by the introduction of competing water transportation. 

8. As to the possible industrial development on the route of the canal, there is no 
doubt that additional sites would be available, having water transportation, but it 
must be remembered that the State already includes much property yet unused having 
these advantages. 

The Army Engineers estimate the cost of construction of the Boston-Taunton ship 
canal at $40,047,000 and the annual cost of maintenance at $836,000. If the State con- 
tributes the right of way at $900,000 and expends say $1,000,000 on terminals, its total 
outlay would be $1,900,000 in addition to the cost to the Federal Government. 

The conditions of transportation may so change in the future as to make such a canal 
desirable and necessary, but the facts as they now appear do not warrant this com- 
mission in advocating the present construction of the proposed canal. We recommend 
that the harbor and land commissioners be instructed to include in its annual report 
each year such statistics and data as may be gathered concerning the progress of 
American waterways, both completed and projected, and especially of such waterways 
as may have reference to or bearing upon the commerce of New England. 
Very respectfully, 

Clarence W. Barron, Chairman. 

Loyed E. Chamberlain. 

Bernard J. Roth well. 

Francis T. Bowles. 

A. Homer Skinner. 

Frank F. Crane. 

John J. Martin, Secretary. 



I Appendix B 1.) 

Report of the Transportation Committee of the Providence Board of Trade 
on the Commercial Value of the Proposed Intracoastal Waterways to 
Rhode Island. 

The Providence Board of Trade having received from Lieut. Col. J. C. Sanford, of 
the engineer office, War Department, at Newport, a communication relative to the 
commercial value of the proposed intracoastal waterway, and having had referred to it 
a similar communication, addressed by Col. Sanford to his excellency Gov. Aram J. 
Pothier, requested its committee on transportation to consider both. That committee, 
having made an exhaustive inquiry, reported to Col. Sanford as follows: 

The commercial value of the proposed Intracoastal Waterway in Rhode Island, by 
itself considered and also as a part of the great scheme of inland waterways, is indorsed 
by the manufacturers and merchants, and appreciated by those who are affiliated 
with transportation companies doing business within the State. It is, however, the 
consensus of opinion that the scheme should not be approached nor considered from 
a Rhode Island point of view only, but rather in connection with the great advantages 
that are to accrue to a considerable part of New England. 

Narragansett Bay is the southern gateway of New England. It has been made so 
by nature, and through the development of commerce, which, while it has grown to 
enormous proportions, has far from reached the limit of its possibilities. To what 
degree that development will extend will depend in a large measure upon the action 
of Congress in dealing with the Intracoastal Waterway proposition. The Federal 
Government is about to begin work of such magnitude in the harbor of Providence 
that it will give a decided impetus to the commerce of the port, and that improvement, 
together with the proposed Rhode Island waterway, will make Providence one of the 
foremost ports on the Atlantic coast, if not the principal one of New England. 

Already Providence is a great commercial distributing point. Under the contem- 
plated harbor improvements, and aided by the Intracoastal Waterway, it will be the 
receiving and shipping port for eastern Connecticut, middle Massachusetts, western 
New Hampshire, and Vermont, not only for the reason that it is geographically the 
key to that large and greatly populated territory with its immense manufacturing and 



154 IXTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTOX, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



general business interests, but because from Providence is afforded quick communica- 
tion by rail to all the interior points. Freight to and from ports lying to the south of 
Rhode Island are now conveyed without being subject to the hazards of the shoals 
of Vineyard Sound and the peril of the lee shore of Cape Cod. The loss of three barges 
with 17 lives on the Peaked Hill Bars, near Provincetown, on January 10, illustrates, 
and forcibly, what that peril is. Moreover, the shorter sail, or tow, annihilates time, 
eliminates cost to the shipper, and ultimately benefits the consumer. 

GENERAL WATERWAY SCHEME APPROVED. 

The Intracoastal Waterway, which is to eliminate for vessels of light draught and 
bottoms under tow the dangers of Point Judith, will greatly increase the commerce of 
Narragansett Bay and benefit the greater part of New England. For these cogent 
reasons, as already stated, the opinion prevails in Rhode Island that the necessity for 
the construction of the Intracoastal Waterway should be considered on the broad plane 
of general utility, rather than that the discussion of the subject be limited to that por- 
tion of the work which is to be prosecuted within the confines of the State. This, 
without waiving the immense benefits which would accrue to the business and affairs 
of the people of the State, should it be deemed advisable by Congress to build the 
Rhode Island section before considering the other and southern links of the waterway. 

Rhode Island stands ready to do its part in a most practical manner in furtherance 
of the work of the War Department and Congress in constructing the Intracoastal 
Waterway. Providence and the other municipalities lying upon the shores of Narra- 
gansett Bay will undoubtedly do their share in providing the essential terminal facil- 
ities which the development of the waterway will require. 

POPULATION OF THREE MILLION TO BE BENEFITED. 

In reply to the specific interrogatories: 

(a) ''What area and what population would be benefited by the proposed Rhode 
Island link?" 

Specifically and assuredly Rhode Island in its entirety; eastern Connecticut, middle 
Massachusetts, western New Hampshire and all of Vermont — the territory now reached 
by the various ramifications of existing railroad systems radiating from Providence and 
those which must ultimately be constructed to care for the increase of commerce which 
the Intracoastal Waterway will bring to Xarragansett Bay. In round numbers, this 
population is placed at 3,000.000, Boston, Worcester, Fall River, Springfield and 
the other lar?e manufacturing centers of Massachusetts as well as those of southern 
New Hampshire being included, as all are in direct rail communication with Provi- 
dence, where large freights arriving on bottoms are now received from New York and 
several of the principal ports on the South Atlantic coast. 

h "'What is the approximate total amount of freight carried to and from this area 
(Rhode Island) annually?" 

EIGHTEEN MILLION TONS OF FREIGHT TRANSPORTED IN RHODE ISLAND. 

The total number of tons of freight transported by rail and water in Rhode Island 
in 1909 was 18,000,000 tons. More than 95 per cent of the finished products of Rhode 
Island manufacturing establishments is shipped out of the State, and, to a very great 
extent, by rail. 

The value of these manufactured products in 1909 was $275,000,000, and of this great 
productive record Providence contributed to the extent of $125,000,000. 

(c) "What proportion, approximately, of the above amount is now carried by 
water? " 

Fully 5,000,000 tons. Recourse to the report of the harbor master at Providence 
determines that the annual arrivals at that port, including commodities bound for 
Phillipsdale and Pawtucket on the Seekonk River, are in excess of 3,000,000 tons. 
The general merchandise by steamers approximates 500,000 tons. The bulk of the 
remaining 2,500,000 tons arrives by steam colliers, barges under tow, and sailing ves- 
sels, although the latter have been steadily dropping out of the commerce of the port, 
a sure indication that an Intracoastal Waterway would bring an increased barge busi- 
ness to the bay. Below Providence the amount of water-borne freight is consid- 
erable. Foremost is the business which pertains to Fall River, Mass., which in 
1909 had a water traffic of nearly 1,400,000 tons. Newport had approximately 240,000 
tons. Taunton River had approximately 127,000 tons. Warren and Bristol had 
approximately 86,000 tons. East Greenwich, Coweset, and Wickford had approxi- 
mately 40,000 tons. Westerly had approximately 55,000 tons last year, about the 
same as in 1909, making a total of 4,948,000 tons arriving annually by water through 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 155 



Narragansett and Little Narragansett Bays. A safe estimate, making allowances for 
miscellaneous freight perhaps not accurately reported, would be 5,000,000 tons per 
year. 

APPROXIMATELY SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND TONS FINISHED PRODUCTS SHIPPED OUT BY 

WATER. 

The out-going water freight is comparatively small in tonnage, as the shipments 
are largely confined to the finished products of Rhode Island and other New England 
industries Approximately the amount of freight shipped out in 1909 was 600,000 
tons, of which, to be exact, 362,776 tons were shipped from Providence by steamers. 

The amount of coal arriving in Providence Harbor in 1910, as given by the harbor 
master, was 2,979,336 tons. The natural inference is that this represents a great 
increase over the coal receipts of that harbor reported in 1900 for the year 1899, prac- 
tically a decade ago. Such, however, is not the case. The arrivals in Providence 
Harbor for that period (1899) aggregated 2,160,979 tons, out of a total tonnage of 
2,973,503 tons. 

PROVIDENCE GAINING STEADILY AS A COAL PORT. 

On the face of these figures it would appear that Providence as a coal receiving 
and distributing port was making no material headway. The fact is, however, that 
the port is steadily gaining with respect to coal. For years Providence was the coal- 
distributing port for a great portion of interior New England, as many hundreds of 
thousands of tons of coal were regularly and annually unloaded at Providence and 
conveyed by rail to Worcester and other prominent manufacturing centers out of 
the State. About five years ago these rail shipments from Providence ceased, since 
when the coal business which was formerly done via Narragansett Bay has been con- 
ducted by all-rail transportation direct from the mines. So thoroughly has the all 
rail system of handling coal supplanted the former coal business of Narragansett 
Bay and Providence Harbor that carload lots are actually brought by rail to some 
of the Providence mills. While losing this great interior New England coal business, 
Providence has steadily gained in local traffic, so that the annual volume of coal 
traffic has reached the comfortable total of approximately 2,339,842 tons. One 
authority places it at approximately 2,660,000 tons. 

WATER-BORNE COTTON FREIGHTS MATERIALLY LESSENED. 

Providence River and Harbor has lost almost wholly the large cotton shipments 
which erstwhile came by water. Formerly sailing vessels brought thousands of bales 
of cotton to Providence annually. To-day the arrivals are confined to shipments by 
steamers. They are consignments forwarded from three of the seaboard cotton depots, 
and constitute parts of general merchandise cargoes. Warren formerly received the 
bulk of its cotton by water; to-day it has none of that class of water-borne freight. 
On the west shore of the bay one coal concern reports the receipt of 1,000 tons of coal 
by water in 1910, as against 4,000 in previous years, the loss of water-borne freight 
being due to all-rail shipments. 

(d) "What is the estimated proportion that would be carried by water if the Rhode 
Island link is constructed? " 

Transportation agents of recognized ability and authority assert that this question 
is hardly possible of being satisfactorily answered. All agree, however, that the con- 
struction of the Rhode Island link would result in a very large quantity of merchandise 
being forwarded via the waterway, not only in the form of coal, cotton, and other raw 
material, but as the finished products of Rhode Island and New England industries 
destined for the cities of the South and West to be reached by the intracoastal water- 
way, and which could be shipped through the canal at much less expense to the 
consumers. 

HIGH-CLASS SERVICEABLE COAL BARGES REQUESTED. 

Local coal men do not agree that coal shipments to Narragansett Bay would be 
materially affected, unless a type of barges was adopted superior to the "square-enders" 
and offering less resistance when under tow than the general type of small capacity 
craft now in vogue. If an improved type of barge was adpoted for the waterway, and 
shipments via the canal were regular and systematic, then a considerable portion of 
the coal traffic could be regularly maintained, the waterway being kept open to traffic 
during the winter months, the coal men would, they say, not be obliged to stock up 
heavily during the summer months to meet possible cessation of water traffic when the 
bay became icebound. The waterway, under the conditions named, would eliminate 
all danger of a coal famine and save to the coal men the interest on investments in 
large stocks. 



156 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



SAVING ON CANAL FREIGHTS EQUAL TO FIFTY PER CENT. 

(e) "What is the estimated reduction in freight rates that could be expected on 
various kinds of freight and at various points in the above area if the Rhode Island 
link is built? " 

It is the opinion of those well posted on the subject of freight transportation that a 
reduction of from 25 to 50 per cent would reasonably be expected and then leave a 
comfortable margin of profit. 

(/) "What saving in time per boat and per year could be expected between Long 
Island Sound and Narragansett Bay if a canal between the two were built; also what 
saving in insurance? Please give instances of delay and causes of delay known to 
you." 

(1) The time saved per boat and per year can not be stated. Different boats expe- 
rience different conditions. Again, the number of trips per boat to these waters vary. 
Delays are due to stress of weather, fogs, and ice. A single instance: Several coal 
barges bound for Providence were tied up at New London for 21 days. This was in 
the fall of 1910. For three weeks the sea was so bad off the Rhode Island coast that 
it was impossible to tow the barges around Point Judith. These craft were generally 
of the "square-end" type, which would be unable to withstand severe pounding and 
racking. Delays of from three days to a week because of bad seas and heavy fogs are 
of frequent occurrence. Were there an inland waterway route these barges could have 
come forward without any delay whatever. 

WOULD BE SATISFACTORY REDUCTION IN COST OF INSURANCE. 

(2) Insurance: Leading insurance authorities agree that there would be but little 
saving on insurance if the risks were confined to shipments via the Rhode Island link, 
but should the intracoastal waterway be extended to Boston, thereby eliminating the 
dangers incident to Vineyard Sound Shoals and the lee shore of Cape Cod, the saving 
on insurance would be from 10 to 20 times greater than that pertaining to the 
business of the Rhode Island link. Present insurance rates are declared to be so low 
that but little paring down could reasonably be expected for the Rhode Island link. 

(g) What development of manufacturing enterprises along the line of the canal 
could be expected?" 

As the cost of transporting building materials would be much reduced, and freights 
on incoming raw materials, as well as on finished products shipped out would be low, 
capital would be attracted and cotton and woolen mills would be erected. Rhode 
Island is stronger on textiles than on any other line or lines of manufacture, and the 
natural trend would be in that direction. Incidentally the building of these mills 
would give further impetus to steam and electrified railroads. Both forms of land 
transportation would be developed to the extent of coupling the new mills with 
existing lines of rails. 

LIGHT -PACKAGE FREIGHT TRAFFIC INCREASE IS PROBABLE. 

(h) "What type of boats, draft and length, would probably be used on the canal, 
considering both boats in existence and those to be built in the future?" 

The opinion prevails among Rhode Island manufacturers and those well informed 
in matters pertaining to water transportation that the process of evolution is in such 
a state, involving as it does the application of the turbine, the gas and gasoline engines, 
to practical maritime commerce, that it is an open question what type of motor power 
or what type of boat would best meet the requirements of the canal and the business 
that it is to accommodate. Whether the boats travel in an individual capacity under 
their own steam or are employed to tow barges, propellers must be relied upon. Not 
only must sufficient depth of water be allowed that the screws may obtain requisite 
hold, but the walls of the canal must be made of sufficient strength to withstand con- 
stant washings due to the churning of the water. It is held that to minimize injury 
to the canal Walls the " square-enders " should not be tolerated, but that barge traffic 
should be limited to bottoms built so as to insure the least possible resistance when 
under tow. These crafts and barges, it is held, should be of such length as to provide 
for sizable cargoes, thereby minimizing cost of transportation and insuring the com- 
mercial utility of the canal. The depth of the boats is considered a matter which 
should be dealt with by those thoroughly conversant with the details of operating 
canals. It is assumed tnat boats of much lighter construction than those sent outside 
will be constructed for the canal. With such a line of crafts the building up of a large 
light-package freight traffic to Philadelphia, Baltimore, and other ports easy of access 
from Rhode Island is considered feasible and probable. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, ST. C. 157 



WHAT IT COSTS TO TEAM LOCAL FREIGHTS. 

(£) " What is the distance and cost of haul from railroad terminal to business center 
in your locality?" 

There is no appreciable distance, as the steam railroads pass through the heart of 
the city of Providence and close by the greater part of the wholesale and retail business 
and adjacent to most of the manufacturing plants. Practically the same conditions 
apply to every city and large town in Rhode Island. The cost of haulage is from 2 \ 
to 4 cents per 'hundred pounds, according to the character and bulkiness of the freight. 

(j) " What is the distance and cost of haul from public water terminals to business 
center at your locality?" 

From 1\ to 4 cents per hundred pounds. The distance from the water terminals to 
the business center varies from one-half to a mile and one-half, the latter haul including 
the dock of the Providence Line, so-called, and that of the Merchants & Miners Trans- 
portation Co. The haul to Olneyville center is 3 miles; to the North End center 4 
miles; and to Manton center 4^ miles. ' 

DEMAND FOR WHARF STORAGE AND BONDING FACILITIES IS PRESSING. 

(k) "What is the approximate amount of package freight, and what are the facilities 
for wharf storage and delivery to consignees at your locality?" 

Confining this question to Providence: The package freight business, incoming, 
in 1909 wa j a little in excess of 450,000 tons. This embraced 416.312 tons of general 
merchandise by steamers. The outgoing merchandise by steamers was 362,776 tons. 
There are no facilities for wharf storage in Providence other than that offered by the 
three steamship lines, but these will soon be provided. There is no public dock and 
no public or bonded warehouse at or near the docks, but there will be ample public 
docks and a bonded warehouse. (See reply under caption "n. ") The only facilities 
afforded for delivery to consignees are those by teaming, such as are incident to a 
general steamship business on privately owned docks. Generally these accommo- 
dations suffice for the handling of merchandise, as quick deliveries are made. But in 
times of congestion of traffic considerable delay is experienced. Local merchants and 
consignees are emphatic in their assertions that a bonded warehouse at the water front 
is one imperative necessity and should be considered in connection with the subject 
under discussion. 

LACK OF MERCHANT MARINE CAUSE OF ALL-RAIL SHIPMENTS. 

(I) "When railroad rates are higher than water rates, and the proportion of bulk 
freight carried by rail is greater than that carried by water, ascertain, if possible, the 
cause of the greater shipment by rail." 

Rail shipments to this territory far exceed the water-borne freight. The reason 
for this is that greater expedition is secured for all-rail shipments; while there is 
lamentable lack of bottom to carry by water. Rates by rail are acknowledged to be 
much higher than those by water; but the uncertainty of securing water-borne con- 
signments on time, because of a lack of merchant marine and the liability of delays 
through storms and stress of weather, causes a preference for all-rail transportation. 
Cotton men, in particular, say that they order their consignments forwarded by rail, 
even at greater cost, rather than risk delay of arrival. 

(m) "Would the difficulty under question (I) be eliminated if the Rhode Island 
Canal were built? " 

In a measure, yes. Much would depend upon the size and character of the boats 
sent through the canal, and the keeping of the waterway open to continuous service. 
Were rapid transit and plenty of bottoms assured, there would without question be 
a big increase of the water-borne freight business of Rhode Island, hence a big 
impetus would be given to the general freight traffic of the southern gateway of New 
England. There would be restoration to a considerable extent of the cotton busi- 
ness now lost to the port, and vast quantities of coal for interior New England w T ould 
be sent to Providence in bottoms. This would bring more capital for the upbuilding 
of the merchant marine to care for the increased traffic. There are periods when the 
lack of our merchant marine is painfully felt; notably so in 1907, when business was 
so brisk all over the country that every railroad was swamped with freight and con- 
gestion was prevalent. An active merchant marine could have greatly ameliorated 
those conditions and have aided in a general forward movement of freight. At that 
time Pawtucket-bound freight laid on the docks at Providence for two weeks. There 
were no cars to be had by which this freight could be forwarded and there were no 
lighters for the short tow up the Seekonk River to Pawtucket — but 4 miles from the 
steamship docks. 



158 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. O. 



RHODE ISLAND MAY DONATE CANAL SITE AND CONSERVE BUSINESS INTERESTS. 

(n) " What assistance could reasonably be expected from the State or municipalities, 
either toward the construction of the canal itself or toward the development of suitable 
terminal facilities?" 

Very substantial and practical aid could reasonably be expected from the State of 
Rhode Island. The Commonwealth holds fee in all tide-flowed grounds. The pro- 
posed layout follows a line of ponds, bogs, marshes, swamps, and water-covered land, 
a very considerable part being tide-flowed. It has been roughly estimated that an 
expenditure of $500,000 would suffice to secure the right of way for the canal. 

Providing Congress directs the building of the canal and will make the necessary 
appropriation recommended by the War Department, Rhode Island will probably 
not only purchase, but will donate the canal site to the Federal Government. It will 
furthermore see to it that the land on either side of the canal is reserved for the proper 
operation of the waterway and that at either end of the canal land will be kept under 
State control for use as terminals, industrial sites, and railroad connections. 

STATE WELL ESTABLISH PUBLIC DOCK NEAR FIELDS POINT. 

So much for the future. Now for the present. The electors of Rhode Island 
approved the issue of $500,000 in bonds and authorized a harbor improvement commis- 
sion to purchase and improve lands for public docks. The bonds have been issued and 
the commission is about to move. Originally it was intended to establish a public 
dock on the East Providence shore and one at Pawtucket. The East Providence site 
has been temporarily abandoned. Instead one is favored at Providence, on the west 
shore of the harbor. The advantage this last site has over the other is that it is but a 
short distance removed from the tracks of the New York, New Haven & Hartford 
Railroad Co., affording quick rail communication with the West, North, and East, and 
it will be not far distant from the proposed layout of the Grand Trunk system, which 
is soon to build a line to Providence to connect with its great western and Canadian 
lines, providing thereby an ocean-to-ocean route. It will also have the advantage of 
being near the proposed public docks of the city of Providence, which will be readily 
reached by the steam and electric railroads and easy of access via Aliens Avenue, the 
coming commercial highway of that city. 

Rhode Island is also contributing to the improvement of the harbor of Providence 
through the work of the harbor improvement commission and may be counted upon 
as an earnest ally in anything which will speed the building and demonstrate the 
utilitarian character of the Intracoastal Waterway. 

A public dock will be provided Pawtucket, by early purchase of site and the 
development of the property. Eventually another such dock will be obtained at 
East Providence, and these three, together with those which Providence will pro- 
vide, will secure all the terminal facilities which the War Department or Congress 
may require as an adjunct of the Rhode Island link of the Intracoastal Waterway. 

PROVIDENCE TO IMPROVE WEST SIDE OP HARBOR LINE. 

Providence is so far removed from the northerly terminus of the waterway that it 
could not reasonably be asked to contribute anything beyond moral support to the 
building of the Rhode Island link, but the city will do its share and more in another 
and thoroughly practical manner. 

Working in conjunction with the Federal authorities, the State and the city of 
Providence will expend practically $1,000,000 for the improvement of its harbor. 
This work will include the intersection of Fields Point and the removal of all that 
sand spit and the contiguous shore, northerly and southerly, so as to provide a straight- 
away channel 25 feet deep at mean low tide from the lower anchorage to che bay. 
That this cut may be made and the channel kept free, a sea wall will be built for a 
distance of 2,900 feet. 

The city council has appropriated $450,000 for this betterment, of which sum 
$63,000 has been expended in the acquirement of adjacent land. It was originally 
intended to provide for the construction of a sea wall, which would cost something 
like $200,000; but upon reflection the decision was arrived at to recommend the 
building of one of a more permanent characte- -one which would stand for 100 years 
or better and serve as the outlying feature of a public dock at which ocean steamships 
might lie. Such a wall will cost not less than $350,000, and such a one will be built. 
It will practically be a continuation of the splendid sea wall to the northerly, just 
constructed by the Providence Gas Co., and in time it can and will be extended 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 159 



southerly without limitation to provide additional public docks. This will give 
Providence public dock accommodations unexcelled east of New Yorl^and open the 
door to general commercial marine competition in lieu of the bottled -up condition 
of the harbor which now exists through private ownership, confined almost wholly 
to one transportation corporation. With the establishment and occupation of the 
public docks must necessarily be provided the bonded warehouse, as these features 
of mercantile commerce are inseparable. 



[Appendix B 2.] 

letter of the governor of rhode island. 

January 24, 1911. 

To the honorable the General Assembly: 

I have the honor to transmit to you herewith a letter addressed to the governor 
from the secretary of the Providence Board of -Trade, accompanying a copy of a 
resolution adopted by the executive council of that body on January 17, 1911, 
requesting the governor to urge upon the general assembly the passage of an act 
authorizing and empowering a State commission to secure rights of way across the 
State of Rhode Island for an intracoastal waterway, with approaches, substantially 
along the route of the survey made by the United States engineers, with a view to 
deeding the same to the Federal Government. 

The board of United States engineers having charge of this survey has completed 
its plans for a sea level waterway at an estimated cost for construction of from 
$15,000,000 to $22,000,000. Its report will shortly be made to the War Department, 
and upon the evidence of public interest and benefit which said report reveals will 
depend largely the light in which the Federal Government will view this projected 
undertaking. 

Believing that this projected waterway across Rhode Island, not only of itself but 
as a link in the great chain of protected waterways contemplated extending from 
Boston Harbor to Florida, means more for the future of the manufacturing and com- 
mercial interests of Rhode Island and southern New England and to the country at 
large than is possible of conception to-day, I would respectfully urge that the sug- 
gestions made in this resolution of the executive council of the Providence Board 
of Trade be accorded most careful and mature consideration by this general assembly, 
and that steps be taken without delay to determine the advisability and expediency 
of the course of State action therein outlined. 

A sknilar proposition is under serious consideration by the New Jersey Legislature 
with reference to the canal link across that State. It is proposed there that the State 
shall purchase liberal quantities of the land on either side of the canal route, such 
land to be kept under State control for use for terminals and approaches, docking 
facilities, and railroad connections. The legislature of that State passed an act in 
1910 carrying with it authority to issue bonds and acquire water-front property by 
purchase or condemnation for the erection of docks and terminals. It has already 
become evident that the demands for riparian lands along the waterway and the 
resulting increase in their value will enable the State to cover t^ieir cost many times 
and to realize a direct profit on its investment. I believe that a similar opportunity 
presents itself to the State of Rhode Island worthy of close attention. 

Pending the consideration of this matter I would respectfully ask that this com- 
munication, with the accompanying resolution of the executive council of the Provi- 
dence Board of Trade, after a reading thereof in both houses, be referred to the com- 
mittee on executive communications. 

Very respectfully, Aram J. Pothier, Governor. 



160 INTEACOASTAL WATEEWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



[Appendix C l.j 

The question of the increased channel width occupied by a steamer or a tow in 
rounding a bend was considered, with a view to determining which of the several 
formulae for increasing the width of a canal at bends might be best. 

Formulae in general use are as follows: 

(2) D=4(R-y / R2_^ 2 

(3) D=60- .005 R 

(4) x= VL 2 +(w+2R) 2 -2R 

in which D=the increase in width necessary, 
L=the length of the ship considered, 
R=the radius of the curve, 
w=the bottom width of the canal, 
x=the total width necessary at the curve. 

Formula 2 was deduced by M. Saint- Yves. (Proceedings of the Sixth International 
Congress of Inland Waterways, pt. 1, p. 77.) 

Formula 3 is from the report of the board of engineers for deep waterways. 

Formula 4 is from the Sixth International Navigation Congress, pamphlet by Mr. 
Derome. 

The results given by these formulae are discordant. It was therefore deemed best 
to make a set of independent observations. Though due to conflicting tidal currents 
and congestion of traffic, the location chosen, at the Battery, New York, is not well 
suited to observations of this character, it was the best then available and a number 
of fairly typical runs were observed, sufficient to afford a fairly satisfactory analysis. 
There was also available a record of similar observations made in 1905 on vessels navi- 
gating the St. Marys River, which are free from variations of speed and course due 
to currents and passing vessels. 

There were in all 60 sets of observations made during a period of 4 days of 8 hours 
each. While it was desired in the New York observations to include vessels of various 
types and sizes, special effort was made to observe the larger and more unwieldy 
units, such as car floats and tows of scows. Upon plotting the positions of the vessels 
and tows observed, it was found that on account of the various interruptions and 
varying influence of the tidal currents the vessels did not maintain a uniform rate of 
speed, nor did they follow a course of uniform curvature. Hence it was necessary 
io confine the analysis to short stretches, where a regular curve could be passed 
through the plotted positions of the vessel's bows. It is evident that the increase of 
width is made necessary by the oblique position with respect to the course taken by 
the unit when moving along a curved sailing line. 

Neglecting wind and current effects, the extent of the departure of the bow and 
stern from the sailing line, assuming a fairly uniform speed such as would be required 
of vessels using a canal, is dependent upon two factors, i. e., the length of the unit 
and the radius of the curve. For tug boats and twin-screw propeller boats, the speed 
undoubtedly does enter, but if the increase of width be made sufficient for a long 
unit, such as a tug TOth barges alongside and in front, it will suffice for shorter units 
moving at greater speed. 

Of the 60 sets of observations taken at the Battery, only 10 were sufficiently free 
from irregularities due to changes of course and speed to be useful. From an analysis 
of these 10 sets and of the St. Marys River observations, the following formula for 
the increase of channel width required on a curved course was deduced, viz: 

D=VR2+T2_R 

in which D=increased width of channel occupied, 
R= radius of curve, 
L=length of ships or unit. 

It is assumed that the point of pivot or gyration is at the bow, with the center line 
of the ship, i. e., the keel, tangent to the curve. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 161 



The following table shows a comparison of the observed increase of channel width 
used and the theoretical necessary increase as deduced from the various formulae: 



Type of unit. 



Observations at Battery, 
New York. 

Tug and one barge 

Steam lighter Leader 

Tug and three barges 

Tug and two car floats 

Steamship Matanzas 

Tug and two car floats 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Observations in St. Mirys 
River. 

Steamer Sylvania 

Steamer H. W. Smith 

Steamer R. W. England. . 

Do 

Steamer Zenith City 

Steamer Bransford 

Steamer Princeton 

Steame* Bransford 

Steamer Yuma 

Steamer John Crerar 

Steamer J. C. Wallace 



Length 
boat 



Feet. 
220 
110 
500 
300 
360 
330 
250 
330 
330 
250 



524 
434 
382 
382 
405 
435 
474 
435 
340 
257 
552 



Radius 

of 
curve. 



Feet. 
3,042 
2, 220 
1,705 
6, 286 
1,315 
3, 320 
1,950 
2, 133 
2, 142 
2,400 



3, 000 
2,333 
2, 333 
2,166 
2,000 
3, 666 
2, 500 
2, 166 
2, 333 
1,834 
2,000 



In- 
creased 
chan- 
nel 
width 
occu- 
pied. 



Feet. 
4.6 
2.0 
156.0 
35.0 
22.0 
47.4 
9.4 
60.1 
65.3 
12.0 



46.0 
36.0 
37.0 
36.0 
46.0 
25.0 
42.0 
40.0 
29.0 
16.0 
63.0 



Cor- 
rection 
for 
cur- 
rent. 



Feet. 



84.0 
26.0 



36.5 



34.6 
45.8 



In- 
crease 

re- 
quired. 



Feet. 

4.6 

2.0 
72.0 

9.0 
22.0 
10.9 

9.4 
25.5 
19.5 
12.0 



46.0 
36.0 
37.0 
36.0 
46.0 
25.0 
42.0 
40.0 
29.0 
16.0 
63.0 



Increase as com- 
puted byformulae — 



(D 1 



Feet. 
7.9 
2.7 
71.8 
7.1 
48.4 
16.3 
15.0 
23.1 
25.2 
13.0 



45. 

40. 

31. 

33. 

40. 

25. 

44.5 

43.2 

24.6 

17.9 

74.7 



(2)2 



Feet. 
7.6 
2.8 
74.0 
7.2 
49.6 
16.4 
16.1 
25.6 
25.6 
13.2 



46.0 
42.4 
31.6 
34.0 
41.2 
26.0 
45.2 
44.0 
24.8 
18.0 



(3)3 



Feet. 
44.8 
48.9 
51.5 
28.6 
53.4 
43.4 
50.2 
49.3 
49.3 
48.0 



45.0 
48.3 
48.3 
49.2 
50.0 
41.7 
47.5 
49.2 
48.3 
50.8 
50.0 



(4)< 



Total 
width. 



Feet. 

128.9 

126.3 

160.1 

128. 5 

148.4 

133.0 

132.8 

137.4 

137.3 

131.3 



147.3 
144.6 
140.1 
141.4 
144.8 
137.6 
146.8 
146.1 
137.1 
133.7 
161.7 



1 D= VR 2 +L 2 -R ^D = 4^R--Y/R2-^y *D = 60-.005 R < x= VL2+(w+2R)2-2R 

It is evident that formulae 1 and 2 give results most nearly in accord with the observations. 
22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 11 



162 INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 

[Appendix C 2.] 

Waterways of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware directly tributary to 
the New Jersey section of the proposed intracoastal canal. 

[Tonnage and valuation from Report of Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, 1910.) 



Stream or waterway. 



Bronx River 

Harlem River 

Hudson River 

Newtown Creek 

Raritan Bay (including South River, Raritan River, Cheese- 
quake Creek, Keyport Harbor, and small per cent of Arthur 
River) 

Shoal Harbor and Compton Creek 

Arthur Kill 

Newark Bay and Passaic River 

Shrewsbury River 

Jamaica Bay 

Elizabeth River 

W oodbridge C reek 

Mantau Creek 

Rancocas Creek 1 

Raccoon Creek 

Wilmington Bay, Del 

Delaware River 

Delaware & Raritan Canal 2 

Delaware Division Canal 1 

Lehigh Canal 1 

Schuylkill Canal i 



Total. 



Navigable 
length. 



Miles. 
i 3 



24 
1 

12 
16 
17 
12 

2.75 

2 
11 

16.6 
9. 75 

6 

60 

66.9 

60 

48 

90 



464 



Short 
tonnage. 



520,215 
12,822,885 



5,113,628 



8,283,839 
37, 761 
9,504,090 
2,650,809 
1,959, 920 
977, 266 
30, 242 
116,459 
125, 605 
462, 971 
58,107 
805,447 
24, 667, 671 
400, 000 

240,625 

54,354 



68,831,894 



Value. 



$1,272,266 
369,009,686 



253,003,661 



107,829,053 
490,975 
131,950,111 
164,800,203 
7,320,000 
3,846,574 
217,877 
587, 164 
1,025,525 

( 3 ) 
719, 750 
64, 290, 775 
1,327,869,862 
( 3 ) 

(?) 

( 3 ) 



2,434,233,482 



1 Preliminary Report of the Inland Waterways Commission, 1908. 

2 Report of committee appointed to investigate Delaware & Raritan Canal to senate of New Jersey, April 
18, 1911. 

3 Not given. 

Principal cities tributary to the New Jersey section of the proposed intracoastal waterway. 
[Population from census of 1910; statistics from census of 1904.] 



City. 



Bayonne 

Camden 

Chester 

Elizabeth 

Harrison 

Hoboken 

Jersey City 

Newark 

New Brunswick. 

New York 

Passaic 

Perth Amboy. . . 

Philadelphia 

Trenton 

West Hoboken.. 
Wilmington, Del 

Total 



Popula- 
tion. 



55,545 
94,538 
38, 537 
73,409 
14,498 
70,324 

267,779 

347, 469 
23, 388 

776, 883 
54, 773 
32, 121 

549, 008 
96, 815 
35, 403 
86, 411 



7, 617, 901 



Wage 
earners. 



7,057 
12, 661 

7,061 
12, 335 

4,040 

7,227 
20, 353 
50, 697 

4, 590 
464, 716 
11,000 

3,950 
228, 899 
14, 252 

3, 562 
13, 554 



865, 954 



Number 
of 

establish- 
ments 



58 
298 
131 
124 

41 
279 
628 
1,600 

71 

20,839 
95 
53 
7,087 
312 
95 
247 



Capital 
involved. 



$50, 297,000 
31,992,000 
22,070,000 
23,564,000 
11,389,000 
11,777,000 
82,395,000 

119,028,000 
10, 393, 000 
1,042,946, 000 
28, 611,000 
11,583,000 

520, 179, 000 
41, 623, 000 
6, 018, 000 
33, 227, 000 



31, 958 



2, 047, 092, 000 



Cost of 
materials. 



$46,984,000 
20,423,000 
10,422,000 
16,982,000 
3,629,000 
6,580,000 
48, 799, 000 
80,689,000 
4, 158,000 
818,029, 000 
13,110, 000 
30, 316, 000 
333, 352, 000 
17,692,000 
3, 122,000 
18,173,000 



1,472,460,000 



Value of 
products. 



$60,634,000 
33,587,000 
16,645,000 
29,301,000 
8,409,000 
14,077,000 
75, 741,000 
150,055,000 
8, 917, 000 
1,526, 523,000 
22,783,000 
34,800,000 
591,388,000 
32, 720, 000 
5, 947, 000 
30,390,000 



2,641,917,000 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 163 



Rivers and harbors tributary to the section affected by the construction of the intracoastal 
waterway south of the New Jersey section as far as Beaufort, N. C. 



Stream or waterway. 



Navigable 
length. 



Short 
tonnage. 



Value. 



Alloway Creek, N. J 

Cooper Creek, N.J 

Delaware River 1 

Christiana River, Del 

Smyrna River, Del 

St. Jones River, Del 

Appoquinimink, Del 

Murderkill River, Del 

Mispillon River, Del 

Broad Creek, Del 

Susquehanna River, Md 

Patapsco River 

Elk River Md 

Chester, Md 

Choptank, Md 

Warwick (Secretary) Creek, Md . 

Pocomoke, Md 

La Trappe (Dividing) Creek, Md 

Manokin, Md. 3 

Wicomico, Md 

Patuxent, Md 

Nanticoke, Del 

Potomac, D. C. and Va 

Anacostia 

Rappahannock 

York River, Va 

Mattaponi River, Va 

Pamunkey, Va 

James River, Va 

Chickahominy, Va 

Appomattox, Va 

Occoquan Creek, Va 

Nandua Creek, Va. 3 

Aquia Creek, Va. 3 

Carters Creek, Va 

Nomini Creek, Va 

Urbana Creek, Va 

Pagan, Va 

Nansemond, Va 

Elizabeth, Va 

North, N. C 

Perquimans, N. C 

Chowan, N. C. 3 

Meherrin, N. C 

Blackwater, Va 

Nottoway, Va. 8 

Alligator, N. C. 3 

Roanoke, N. C 

Scuppernong, N. C 

Fishing Creek, N. C 

Pamlico and Tar, N. C 

Contentnia Creek, N. C 

\ Neuse, N. C 

I Trent, N. C 

| Chesapeake & Delaware Canal 3 . . 

Chesapeake & Ohio Canal 3 

Dismal Swamp Canal 

Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal. . 

Newbern & Beaufort 8 

Fairfield Canal 3 

Chesapeake Bay 

Total 



Miles. 

10 
9 

60 
6 
9 

21 

9 
12 

n 

5* 
11 
16 
39 1 
46 

2 
28 

3 

12 
23 
46 
36 
113 

H 

106 
41 
39 
62 
104 
32 
11 
6 
4 

6 2 
4 
12 
18 
25 

26 
50 
11 
13 
12 
30 
129 
23 

m 

s 108 
50£ 
136 
38 
14 
185 
8 22 
9 
3 
4 

220 



17,565 
244,222 



$611,500 
2,073,188 



815,245 
203,580 
113,550 
29,250 
26,067 
187,356 

( 2 ) 
41,730 
8,415,220 
55,718 
54,618 

234,920 
68,017 
74,459 
15,394 
32,076 

224,983 

( 2 ) 

135,241 
2,915,132 

450,213 

397,210 
85,139 
86,087 
59,961 

476, 465 

( 2 ) 
38,489 
32,701 
5,119 
19,000 
68,842 
27,285 
31,877 
84,424 
96,251 
10,972,999 

195,237 
27,383 

( 2 ) 

14,802 
5,413 
( 2 ) 
( 2 ) 

68, 113 

20,556 
2,300 
310,542 

24,679 
402,428 
156,530 
683,086 
225,142 
361,665 
195,237 

81,770 
( 2 ) 



64,707,575 
4,979,740 
6,055,129 
1,786,400 
1,324,700 
4,085,500 

( 2 ) 
475,933 
107,206,559 
346,733 
4.121,412 
19,357,086 
3,618,998 
5,354,154 
1,045,114 
( 2 ) 

17,000,080 
( 2 ) 

8,702,054 

51,620,428 

6,462,912 
6,220,752 
1,655,737 
514, 144 
32,163,423 

( 2 ) 
630,250 
266,917 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

1,456,728 
1,138,998 
1,068,550 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

< 43, 958, 080 

( 2 ) 
552,350 

( 2 ) 

1,125,260 
866,080 
( 2 ) 
( 2 ) 

1,383,905 
556,401 
22,600 
5,560, 166 
486,980 
7,472,530 
3,417,045 
( 2 ) 
( 2 ) 

5,670,070 
( 2 ) 
( 2 ) 
( 2 ) 



2,135f 



29,611,391 



427,122,161 



1 Statistics incorporated in New Jersey section. 

2 No statistics. 

8 Preliminary Report of the Inland Waterways Commission, 1908. 
« For 5,805,268 tons. 

Tonnage and vaulation from Report of Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, for 1910. 



164 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, W m C. 

Principal cities and towns tributary to the section affected by the construction of the Intra- 
coastal Waterway south of the New Jersey section as far as Beaufort, N. C. 



[Population from census of 1910; statistics from census of 1904.] 



City. 


Popula- 
tion. 


Wage 
earners. 


Number 
of estab- 
lish- 
ments. 


Capital. 


Cost of ma- 
terials. 


Value of 
products. 


Baltimore 

Newbern, N. C 

Newport News 

Norfolk 

Richmond 

Washington, D. C 

Wilmington, N. C 

Total 


558, 485 
9,961 
20,205 
67,452 
127,628 
331,069 
25,748 


65,224 
762 
7,406 
3,063 

12,883 
6,299 
1,667 


2,163 
21 
25 
123 
281 
482 
55 


$148,764,000 
1,233,000 
22,958,000 
4,576,000 
31,953,000 
20,200,000 
1,926,000 


$81,014,000 
675, 000 
4,479,000 
3,261,000 
13,102,000 
7,732,000 
1,823, 000 


$151,547,000 
1,343,000 
9, 054, 000 
5,900,000 
28,203,000 
18,359,000 
3,155,000 


1, 140, 548 


97,304 


3,150 


231,610,000 


112, 086, 000 


217,561,000 



Rivers and harbors tributary to the section affected by the construction of the Intracoastal 
Waterway north of the New Jersey section as far as Boston, Mass. 

[Tonnage and valuation from Report of Chief of Engineers U. S. Army, for 1910.] 



Stream or waterway. 



Taunton River, Mass 

Providence Harbor, R. I 

Thames River, Conn 

Connecticut River, Conn 

Housatonic River, Conn 

Mystic River, Mass 

Gloucester Harbor, Mass 

Beverly Harbor, Mass 

Lynn Harbor, Mass 

Boston Harbor, Mass 

Dorchester Harbor, Mass 

Weymouth River, Mass 

Hingham Harbor, Mass. 

Plymouth Harbor, Mass 

Nantucket Harbor, Mass 

Woods Hole Channel, Mass 

New Bedford Harbor, Mass — 

Sakonet Harbor, R.I 

Fall River Harbor, Mass 

Pawtucket, R. I 

Newport Harbor, R. I 

Block Island, R. I 

Pawcatuck, R. I. and Conn 

New London Harbor, Conn — 

Branford Harbor, Conn 

New Haven Harbor, Conn 

Bridgeport Harbor, Conn 

Norwalk Harbor, Conn 

Five Mile River Harbor, Conn. 

Stamford Harbor, Conn 

Southport Harbor, Conn 

Greenwich Harbor, Conn 

Westport Harbor, Conn 

Port Chester Harbor, N. Y 

Mamaroneck, N. Y 

Echo Bay, N. Y 

Port Jefferson Harbor, N. Y. . . 

Huntington Harbor. N. Y 

Glea Cove Harbor, N. Y 



Total. 



Navigable 
length. 



Miles. 
113* 



15 

i 50 
• 13 
6 



( 2 ) 



1 101 



132 



Short ton- 
nage. 



175,599 
3,814,982 
522,829 
614,780 
81,485 
4,894,088 
218, 165 
196,203 
359,195 
( 2 ) 

251,667 
339,351 
11,086 
58,246 
28, 550 
43,032 
1,392,802 
7,385 
1,331,729 
475,255 
239,924 
18,668 
60,724 
707,768 
40,880 
1,429,809 
1,117,131 
222,787 
22,265 
264,615 
6,912 
79,727 
12,873 
255, 067 
106,344 
248, 180 
129,365 
43,289 
7,062 



19,793,839 



1 Preliminary Report of Inland Waterways Commission, 1908. 2 Statistics not given. 

250 miles from New York to Boston via Long Island Sound and Cape Cod Canal. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 165 



Principal cities and towns tributary to the section affected by the construction of the Intra- 
coastal Waterway north of the New Jersey section as far as Boston, Mass. 

[Population from census of 1910; statistics from census of 1904.] 









Nuni ber 








City. 


± opuia- 


w age 


nf 

01 




l^OSl 01 


XT 1 

value of 


tion. 


earners. 


establish- 


Capital. 


materials. 


products. 








ments. 






Boston 


670,585 


59, 160 


2,747 


$131,563,000 


$94, 603, 000 


$184,351,000 


Bridgeport, Conn 


102, 054 


19, 492 


306 


49,381,000 


22,335,000 


44,587,000 


Fall Kiver, Mass 


119,295 


26,836 


234 


69,375,000 


26,096,000 


43,473,000 


Lynn, Mass 


89,336 


21,540 


431 


23, 139, 000 


32,616,000 


55,003,000 


New Bedford, Mass 


96, 652 


17,855 


176 


40,410,000 


16,091,000 


29,469,000 


New Haven, Conn 


133, 605 


21, 437 


490 


31,413,000 


18,521,000 


39,666,000 


New London, Conn 


19, 659 


2, 554 


57 


4,590,000 


2, 527,000 


4, 710,000 


Plymouth, Mass 


11,200 


2,300 


35 


7,910,000 


8,568,000 


11,116,000 


Salem, Mass 

Stamford, Conn 


43, 697 


5,945 


143 


9,670,000 


7,921,000 


12,202,000 


25, 138 


3,341 


62 


7,526,000 


2,330,000 


5,890,000 




1,311,221 


180, 460 


4,681 


374,977,000 


231,608,000 


430,467,000 



Rivers and harbors tributary to the section affected by the construction of the Intracoastal 
Waterway north of the New Jersey section, including New York Barge Canal system. 



Stream or waterway. 


Navigable 
length. 


Short 
tonnage. 


Value. 




Miles. 






Hudson River 


1 153 


2 3, 254, 423 


2 $237, 214, 824 


Erie Canal 


» 355 


3 2,385,491 




Champlain Canal 


181 


3 740, 983 




Oswego Canal 


i 38 


3 172, 228 


• 4 66,501,417 


Cayuga & Seneca Canal 


125 


3 164, 875 




Black River Canal 


5 46 


3 77,331 




Total 


698 


6, 795, 331 


303, 716, 241 



1 Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on Transportation by Water, 1909. 

2 Report of Chief of Engineers, 1910. 

3 Special Report on Transportation by Water, Bureau of the Census, 1906. 

4 Report of the Barge Canal Terminal Commission, State of New York, 1911, vol. 1. 

5 Report of New York State Engineer, 1905, vol. 2. 

2,300 miles— sailing distance on Great Lakes, St. Lawrence River, and Lake Champlain. 



Principal cities and towns tributary to the section affected by the construction of the Intra- 
coastal Waterway north of the New Jersey section and in the State of New York. 

[Population from census of 1910; statistics from census of 1900.] 



City. 


Popula- 
tion. 


Wage 
earners. 


Number 
of estab- 
lish- 
ments. 


Capital. 


Cost of 
materials. 


Value of 
products. 


Albany 


100, 253 


12,389 


1,566 


$21,329,000 


$11,122,000 


$24, 992,000 


Troy 


76,813 


21,564 


662 


23, 532, 000 


11,292,000 


28,209,000 


Syracuse 


137, 249 


14,917 


1,383 


31,358,000 


14,771,000 


31,948,000 


Rochester 


218, 149 


33, 408 


2,616 


49,086,000 


32,082,000 


69, 130, 000 


Buffalo 


423, 715 


43, 422 


3,902 


103,940,000 


73,359,000 


122,230,000 


Whitehall 


4,917 


403 


47 


643,000 


320, 000 


597,000 


Schenectady 


72,826 


4,431 


388 


6, 518,000 


4,954,000 


9,288,000 


Rome 


20.497 


2,653 


196 


3,738,000 


3, 723, 000 


6,094,000 


Cohoes 


24, 709 


8,673 


316 


11,316,000 


6, 120, 000 


11,636,000 


Haverstraw 


5, 669 


1, 174 


110 


1,306,000 


406,000 


1,366,000 


Hudson 


11,417 


1,403 


144 


2,357,000 


1,496,000 


3,097,000 


Kingston 


. 25,908 


2, 685 


344 


3, 658, 000 


2, 561, 000 


5,280,000 


Lansingburg 




2,940 


127 


2, 958, 000 


1,598,000 


3,778,000 


Ossining 


11,480 


892 


137 


1,358,000 


885, 000 


2,068,000 


Peekskill 


15,245 


1,524 


153 


1, 712, 000 


1,024,000 


2,339,000 


Poughkeepsie 


27, 936 


3,432 


377 


5, 688,000 


3, 475, 000 


6,827,000 


Saugerties 


3,929 


580 


117 


1,202,000 


718,000 


1,352,000 


Tarry town 


5,600 


375 


77 


408,000 


327,000 


719,000 


Utica 


74, 419 


10,759 


733 


19, 290, 000 


9,405,000 


19, 551,000 


Watervliet 


15,074 


1, 167 


135 


1,827,000 


850,000 


1, 809, 000 


Yonkers 


79,803 


8,615 


387 


13,097,000 


10, 555, 000 


19,580,000 


Total 


1,355,608 


1,605,840 


13,917 


306,381,000 


191,043,000 


371,890,000 



I 

I 



TABLE OF CONTENTS AND INDEX TO APPENDIX C 3. 



CONTENTS. 

Rage. 

Statement of the committee 175-179 

Scope of inquiry and sources of information 175 

Volume and value of traffic within section affected by the proposed canal. . 175 
Declining use of sailing vessels and increasing use of barges in coastwise 

commerce 176 

Freight rates by the proposed canal 176 

Probable traffic through the proposed canal 177 

Probable effects of the proposed canal upon railway traffic and industrial 

development 178 

General conclusions 178-179 

I. Approximate amount of water traffic of North Atlantic seaboard 179-185 

United States census statistics on coastwise traffic 179 

War Department statistics on coastwise traffic 180 

United States Bureau of Statistics figures on coastwise traffic 180 

Data of board of navigation commissioners of Philadelphia 181 

Traffic of present canals 181 

Number and tonnage of vessels engaged in section adjacent to pro- 
posed canal 184 

II. Railroad traffic between points adjacent to the proposed waterway 185-187 

Total rail tonnage in Districts I, II, and IV, as shown in Interstate 

Commerce Commission reports 185 

Tonnage of New Jersey division of Pennsylvania Railroad, and Central 

Railroad of New Jersey * 185 

Statement of Pennsylvania Railroad and Philadelphia & Reading 
Railway 186 

III. Production in Territory adjacent to proposed canal 187-193 

Total manufactures in adjacent States 187 

Total manufactures of leading ports 188 

Leading manufacturing industries 189 

Manufactures in five industrial districts 190 

Mineral production in adjacent States 191 

Lumber production in adjacent States 192 

Agricultural production in adjacent States 193 

IV. Barge traffic of the North Atlantic 194-202 

Present amount and relative growth of barge traffic 195 

United States census and United States Commissioner of Naviga- 
tion figures ' 194 

Record of American shipping data „ 195 

Advantages of barges as means of transportation 195 

Barge rates compared with railroad rates 197 

Delays in railroad transportation 198 

Dependence of barge transportation upon an inland route 198 

Disasters to vessels in coastwise trade 199 

Marine insurance 200 

Inadequacy of present canals 201 

Expansion of barge transportation by proposed canal 202 

V. Freight cartage at Philadelphia 202-204 

VI. Water terminal facilities 204-206 

Importance of terminal facilities 204 

Water terminals at — 

Philadelphia 205 

New York 206 

Baltimore 206 

intermediate points 206 



167 



168 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Page. 

VII. Development of local industries in New Jersey 206-208 

Clay resources 206 

Sand and gravel deposits 207 

Truck farming and fruit growing 207 

Industrial development along German waterways 208 

VIII. Probable shipments from Philadelphia, Wilmington, Chester, Trenton, 
Baltimore, Norfolk, Newport News, and other points at southern 

terminus of the proposed canal 208-209 

Bulky freight : 208 

General merchandise 209 

Statements of shippers and receivers of freight 209 

IX. Probable shipments from New York Bay and New England points... 209-210 

Bulky freight 209 

Erie & Champlain Canal freight 210 

Package freight 210 

Foreign freight received via New York 210 

Statements of shippers and receivers of freight 210 

X. Effect of canal upon railroad traffic 210-211 

Diversion of existing water traffic 211 

Diversion of railroad traffic 211 

Creation of new traffic ! 211 

Appendix A. — Opinions of naval authorities upon the naval value of the pro- 
posed canal 211-214 

B. — List of vessels lost along the north Atlantic seaboard, 1906-1910. 215-219 

C. — Estimated reduction m freight rates resulting from proposed 

canal 220-222 

D. — Rail class rates between New York and Philadelphia, New York 

and Baltimore, and Philadelphia and Baltimore; canal rates 
between Philadelphia and Baltimore and between Phila- 
delphia and New York 222-224 

E. — Statement by Mr. H. F. Stetser concerning traffic of proposed 

New York-Philadelphia Canal 224-226 

F. — Traffic reports received from Trenton, N. J., Newark, N. J., and 

Richmond, Va 226 



INDEX 



Adjacent points: Page- 
Tonnage of vessels 184 

Railroad traffic of 185 

Adjacent territory, production of 187 

Adjacent States, manufactures of 187 

Agricultural products 193 

Amount and growth of barge traffic 194 

American shipping, report of 195 

Authorities, naval, on naval value of canal 211-214 

Barges, increasing use of 176 

Bureau of Statistics, report of 180 

Board of Navigation Commissioners of Philadelphia 181 

Barge traffic: 

North Atlantic . 194-202 

Amount and growth 195 

Census report 194 

Commissioners of navigation report 194 

American shipping report 195 

Barges, advantages of 195 

Barge rates compared with railroad rates 197 

Barge transportation on inland route 198 

Barge transportation, expansion of 202 

Baltimore, water terminal facilities 206 

Bulky freight 209 

Barges, capacity of 177 

Boats, canal, and barges, documented 194 

Committee statement 175-179 

Canal: 

Freight rates 176 

Probable traffic through 177, 224 

Probable effects of 178 

Conclusions, general 178-179 

Census statistics on coastwise traffic 179 

Coastwise traffic: 

Census statistics 179 

War Department statistics 180 

Bureau of Statistics 180 

Commissioners, Board of Navigation, Philadelphia 181 

Canals, traffic of present 181 

Central Railroad of New Jersey, tonnage 175 

Canal, production in adjacent territory 187-193 

Census report, barge traffic 194 

Commissioners of navigation, barge traffic 194 

Coastwise trade, disasters to vessels 199 

Canals, inadequacy of present 201 

Cartage, freight, at Philadelphia 202-204 

Clay resources of New Jersey 206 

Creation of new traffic 211 

Canal: 

Naval value of proposed 211-214 

Rates 222-224 

Capacity of barges 177 

Cost of sea-level canal 178 

Coal shipments of Philadelphia, coastwise 182 

Coastwise shipments of coal from Philadelphia 182 

Classification of freight traffic 186-187 

Canal boats and barges, documented 194 

Colliers, steam, conversion of 195 

169 



170 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 



Page. 

Conversion of steam colliers 195 

Comparative rail and barge rates 197 

Charges, tonnage 201 

Declining nse of sailing vessels 176 

Development, industrial, probable effects on 178 

Data of Board of Navigation Commissioners, Philadelphia 181 

Delays in railroad transportation 198 

Disasters to vessels in coastwise trade 199 

Development of local industries in New Jersey 206-208 

Deposits, sand and gravel, in New Jersey 207 

Development, industrial, German waterways 208 

Diversion of existing water traffic 211 

Diversion of railroad traffic 211 

Documented tonnage at — 

New York 184 

Philadelphia 182 

Ports adjacent 179 

Documented canal boats and barges 194 

Effects, probable, of canal upon — 

Railroad traffic 178 

Industrial development 178 

Expansion of barge transportation 202 

Existing water traffic, division of 211 

Estimated reduction in freight rates 220-222 

Freight rates by proposed canal 176 

Freight cartage at Philadelphia 202-204 

Fruit growing in New Jersey 207 

Freight: 

Bulky 208 

Statement of shippers and receivers of 209 

Package 210 

Foreign, received at New York 210 

Foreign freight received at New York 210 

Freight rates, estimated reduction in 220-222 

Freight traffic, classification of 186 

Forsyth, Rear Admiral James M 213 

General conclusions 178-179 

Growth and amount of barge traffic 195 

Gravel deposits, New Jersey 207 

German waterways, industrial development on 208 

General merchandise 209 

Hasskarl, J. F., letter from 204-205 

Hobson, Capt. Richmond P., views of 213-214 

Information, sources of „ 175 

Increasing use of barges 176 

Industrial districts, manufactures of 190 

Industries, leading manufacturing 189 

Inland route, barge transportation on 198 

Insurance, marine 200 

Inadequacy of present canals 201 

Intermediate points, water terminals 206 

Industries, local, of New Jersey, development of 206-208 

Industrial development along German waterways 208 

Leading ports, manufactures of 188 

Leading manufacturing industries 189 

Lumber production 192 

Local industries, development of 206-208 

List of vessels lost, 1906-1910 215-219 

Lost vessels, list of, 1906-1910 215-219 

Leading cities, manufactures of 188 

Manufactures — 

In adjacent States 187 

Of leading ports 188 

In five industrial districts 190 

Manufacturing industries, leading 189 

Mineral production in adjacent States 191 



INTR AC ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 171 



Page. 

Marine insurance 200 

Merchandise, general 209 

Manufactures by — 

States....... 187 

Leading cities 188 

Melville, Rear Admiral George W 212 

North Atlantic seaboard, water traffic on 179-185 

Navigation commissioners of Philadelphia, data of 181 

Number and tonnage of vessels 184 

New Jersey division of Pennsylvania Railroad, statistics . 185 

Navigation, commissioners of, report on barge traffic 195 

New York, water terminal facilities 206 

New Jersey: 

Clay resources of 206 

Sand and gravel deposits 1 207 

Truck farming 207 

Fruit growing 207 

New York Bay, probable shipments from 209-210 

New England points, probable shipments from 209-210 

New York, statement of shippers 210 

New traffic, creation of 211 

Naval authorities, opinions of 211-214 

Naval value of proposed canal 211-214 

Newark, traffic reports received from 226 

Neall, Frank L., letter from 220-222 

Opinions of naval authorities on naval value of proposed canal 211-214 

Opinions of shippers and receivers of freight 209 

Proposed canal: 

Value of traffic in 175 

Freight rates by 176 

Probable traffic through canal 177 

Probable effects of canal on railroad traffic 178 

Present canals, traffic of 181 

Points adjacent to canal, railroad traffic of 185-187 

Pennsylvania Railroad : 

Tonnage of New Jersey division 185 

Statement of 186 

Production in territory of proposed canal 187-193 

Ports, manufactures of leading 188 

Production, mineral, in adjacent States 191 

Present canals, inadequacy of 201 

Philadelphia: 

Freight cartage 202-204 

Terminals 205 

Points, intermediate, water terminals 206 

Probable shipments from : 

Philadelphia 208-209 

New York Bay 209-210 

New England points 209-210 

Package freight 210 

Proposed canal: 

Naval value of 211-214 

Traffic of 224-226 

Philadelphia: 

Coal shipments of 182 

Documented tonnage of 185 

Ports adjacent, documented tonnage of 184 

Philadelphia & Reading Railway, statement of . 186 

Rates of freight on proposed canal 176 

Railroad traffic and industrial development 178 

Railroad traffic between adjacent points 185-187 

Rail tonnage in Districts I, II, and IV 185 

Rail rates compared with barge rates 197 

Railroad transportation, delays in 198 

Route, inland, barge transportation on 198 

Resources of New Jersey 206-207 



172 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Page. 

Receivers of freight, statements of — 209-210 

Receipts of foreign freight at New York 210 

Railroad traffic, effect of 210-211 

Reduction in freight rates 220-222 

Reports of traffic from Trenton and Newark, N. J., and Richmond, Va 226 

Rail class rates 222-224 

Rates, canal 222-224 

Rail and barge rates, comparison 197 

Richmond, Va., reports of traffic 226 

Statement of the committee 175-179 

Scope of inquiry 175 

Sources of information 175 

Section affected by canal, traffic therein 175 

Sailing-vessels, declining use of , 176 

Statistics: 

Census, on coastwise traffic 179 

War Department, on coastwise traffic 180 

Bureau of, on coastwise traffic 180 

Section adjacent to canal, tonnage of vessels in 184 

Statement of Pennsylvania Railroad and Philadelphia & Reading Railroad. . . 186 

Sand deposits, New Jersey 207 

Shipments, probable, from — 

Philadelphia 208-209 

New York Bay 209-210 

New England 209-210 

Shippers, statements of 209 

Statements of shippers 209 

Stetser, H. F., letter from 224-226 

Sea-level canal, cost of. 178 

Shipments of coal from' Philadelphia 182 

Steam colliers, conversion of 195 

Sperry, Rear Admiral 0. S., views of 211-212 

Traffic, within sections adjacent to canal 175 

Traffic, probable, through canal 177 

Traffic, railroad, effect of canal upon 178 

Traffic, water, on North Atlantic seaboard 179-185 

Traffic, coastwise: 

Census statistics 179 

War Department statistics 180 

Bureau of Statistics ' 180 

Traffic of present canals 181 

Traffic, railroad, nearby section 185-187 

Tonnage of vessels, nearby section 184 

Tonnage: 

Rail, Districts I, II, and IV. 185 

New Jersey division, Pennsylvania Railroad 185 

Central Railroad of New Jersey 185 

Pennsylvania Railroad 186 

Philadelphia & Reading Railroad 186 

Territory, adjacent, production in 187-193 

Traffic, barge: 

Of North Atlantic 194-202 

Amount and growth 195 

Census report 194 

Commissioners of navigation , 194 

' 'American shipping " 195 

Transportation: 

Delays in railroad 198 

Barge, on inland route 198 

Expansion of barge 202 

Terminal, water, facilities 204-206 

Terminal, water, facilities at — 

Philadelphia 205 

New York 206 

Baltimore 206 

Intermediate points 206 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 173 



Page. 

Truck farming, New Jersey 207 

Traffic: 

Railroad, effect on, of canal 210-211 

Water, diversion of existing 211 

Railroad, diversion of existing , 211 

Creation of new 211 

Reports received 226 

Trenton, report on traffic 226 

Traffic of proposed canal 224-226 

Traffic, classification of freight. . . 186-187 

Towage charges 201 

Volume of traffic 175 

Value of traffic 175 

Vessels, number and tonnage of 184 

Water traffic on North Atlantic seaboard 179-185 

War Department's statistics, coastwise traffic 180 

Waterway, railroad traffic, adjacent territory 185-187 

Water terminal facilities 204-206 

Water terminals at — 

Philadelphia 205 

New York 206 

Baltimore 206 

Intermediate points 206 

Waterways, German, industrial development on 208 

Wrecks on Atlantic coast 215-219 



[Appendix C 3.J 



TRAFFIC OF THE NEW YORK-PHILADELPHIA CANAL. 

[Recort of the Committee on Traffic of the proposed Intracoastal Canal connecting New York and Delaware 

Bays.] 

The committee on the traffic of the proposed intracoastal canal connecting New 
York and Delaware Bays, appointed in November, 1910, by the president of the Atlan- 
tic Deeper Waterways Association at the request of a citizens' committee of sixty, 
consisting of men from New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, submits 
the following report: 

SCOPE OF INQUIRY AND SOURCES OP INFORMATION. 

A detailed investigation of the available statistical and other sources of information 
has been made by the committee, with the aid of expert assistance. Ten thousand 
circular letters were sent out, chiefly to manufacturers and shippers along the Atlantic 
seaboard, asking what use they would make of the proposed canal and how it would 
affect their business. Interviews were had with coastwise carriers (steam, sail, and 
barge), the traffic officers of the Pennsylvania Railroad and the Philadelphia & Read- 
ing Railway, and with many individuals having knowledge that might be of assist- 
ance to the committee. 

The Board of Trade of Newark, N. J., and the Chambers of Commerce in Trenton, 
N. J., and Richmond, Va., sent the committee valuable special reports upon the 
probable commercial influence of the proposed waterway. 

The following sections of this report present in detail the statistics of the commerce 
and the industrial activities that would be directly and indirectly served by the 
Philadelphia-New York link of the chain of intracoastal waterway. The tables of 
statistics herewith presented are compiled from numerous sources, but mainly from 
(1) the report made by the United States Bureau of the Census in 1906 upon "Trans- 
portation by water," (2) the statistics on coastwise traffic contained in the 1906 and 
1909 reports of the Corps of Engineers of the United States Army, (3) the latest annual 
reports of the United States Department of Agriculture, (4) of the United States Geo- 
logical Survey, (5) of the United States Commissioner of Navigation, and (6) of the 
Interstate Commerce Commission. 

Attention may also be given to the report upon "Transportation by water," issued 
by the United States Bureau of Corporations in 1910. 

VOLUME AND VALUE OF TRAFPIC WITHIN THE SECTION AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED 

CANAL. 

According to the report of the Bureau of the Census the cargo tonnage handled 
coastwise within the district between the ports of Bangor, Me., and Newbern, N. C, 
amounted to 76,000,000 tons in 1906. The reports compiled by the United States 
Army Engineers for 1909 make the total coastwise traffic within the same territory 
143,000,000 tons. Which of these totals is more nearly correct the committee has no 
means of knowing. The census figures, while much smaller than those compiled by the 
Army engineers, show a large volume of coastwise traffic along the Atlantic seaboard. 

The total rail traffic (including traffic received from connecting roads) in the New 
England States, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, 
West Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, amounted in 1909 to 574,000,000 
tons; and of this approximately 325,000,000 tons originated along the rail lines in 
these States. 

The committee has not been able to ascertain the tonnage of rail traffic moving 
between New York and Philiadelphia. The figures supplied by the railways were 
only partial. It is believed that the rail traffic between the North Atlantic ports is 
less than the tonnage, moving by water between these points. 

The annual reports of the Pennsylvania Railroad and the Philadelphia & Reading 
Railway show a total rail tonnage in 1909 for the entire New Jersey division of the 



175 



176 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



former railroad and for the Central Railroad of New Jersey of approximately 54,000,000 
tons; but of this only a relatively small share moves between the ports of New York 
and Philadelphia. The major portion moves between interior points, and between 
interior points and the ports of New York and Philadelphia. 

The district to be affected by the proposed waterway is one of great industrial impor- 
tance. According to the census of 1905, the manufacturing districts of the seaboard 
States from Maine to North Carolina, inclusive, annually use raw materials valued at 
$4,332,000,000 and have an output valued at $7,671,000,000. At the leading ports 
from Bangor, Me., to Newbern, N. C, inclusive, raw materials to the amount of 
$1,824,084,000 are annually used by the manufacturing industries and a finished 
product amounting to $3,306,911,000 is produced. According to the United States 
Geological Survey, a mineral production valued at $591,000,000 was produced in 1908 
in the seaboard States from Maine to North Carolina, inclusive. The census of 1905 
reports an annual lumber output valued at $116,000,000 in these States, and the total 
for these and the seaboard and Gulf States south of North Carolina, all of which make 
northern shipments, was valued at $255,000,000. The United States Department of 
Agriculture reports that the agricultural products within the seaboard States from 
Maine to North Carolina, inclusive, amounted in 1909 to $688,000,000, and this does 
not include truck farming and dairy products, which are items of rapidly increasing 
value within this territory. 

DECLINING USE OP SAILING VESSELS AND THE INCREASING USE OP BARGES IN 

COASTWISE COMMERCE. 

The use of sailing vessels in the coastwise traffic of the United States is steadily and 
rapidly declining. The total tonnage of shipping on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts 
increased from 2,650,000 tons in 1889 to 4,850,000 tons in 1906; but the gain was in 
steamships and barges or unrigged craft operated principally by transportation com- 
panies, which in turn are largely owned by railroad lines, while the tonnage of inde- 
pendent sailing vessels available for all kinds of commerce decreased during the same 
period 160,287 tons. The storms of every winter levy their toll upon sailing vessel 
tonnage, and the loss is not made up. 

The sailing fleet is being replaced for the most part, as the needs of established lines 
require, by steamers and steam-towed barges. The Bureau of the Census reported in 
1906 a total tonnage of unrigged craft on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of 2,260,000, 
which tonnage exceeded that of freight and passenger steamships by 1,214,811, and 
was 1,154,721 tons greater than the sailing tonnage. The unrigged craft comprised 
46^ per cent of the total tonnage employed on the Atlantic and Gulf seaboards. 

The reasons accounting for the substitution of barges for sailing vessels are indicated 
by the experience of one company transporting coal between Philadelphia and New 
England ports. The sailing vessels formerly used by this company in this service 
had an average capacity of 1,200 tons burden, and the fleet employed could deliver, 
by making 500 voyages, about 600,000 tons per annum. The barges now employed 
have a capacity of 1,600 to 3,000 tons each and are operated in tows. By making 300 
voyages and by dispatching 1,150 barge loads, the company is now able to transport 
2,400,000 tons per annum. 

Barges are equally well adapted to the lumber traffic, and it is probable that they 
will be used in the future for the transportation of the greater part of bulky coastwise 
freight. Barges have certain advantages over sailing vessels as carriers of bulk cargo 
and for some kinds of traffic over steamships, because of their smaller initial cost of 
construction, the more continuous and effective use that may be made of their motive 
power, and of their movement in fleets, with a consequent reduction in the number 
of crew required to operate the craft. Barges will have a further advantage over 
sailing vessels in case a large-capacity intracoastal canal is opened, because the barges 
can be operated through such a waterway with the regularity of steamship traffic. 

FREIGHT RATES BY THE PROPOSED CANAL. 

The evidence prepared for the committee indicates that the proposed waterway 
would result in a large saving in freight rates. Present barge rates — via the outside 
route north from Philadelphia and the outside and inside routes south therefrom — on 
bulky freight carried between the ports of the Atlantic and Gulf seaboards a*e much 
lower than corresponding railroad rates. The following comparative rail and barge 
rates are representative and emphasize the marked difference in existing charges. 
This difference would be still greater in case the proposed canal were constructed, 
because larger barges could be used for inland traffic, because of the absence of canal 
tolls, and because of the reduced cost of marine insurance. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 177 

Comparative rail and barge rates. 



Commodity. 



Lumber 

Sand 

Hailroad ties 

fig iron 

Pulp wood 

Fertilizer 

Coke 

Cinders 

Clay 

Coal anthracite 2 . . 

Do. 2 



Origin and destina- 
tion. 



Norfolk to Philadel- 
phia. 

Philadelphia to New 
York. 

Norfolk to Philadel- 
phia. 

do 

....do 

Philadelphia to Nor- 
folk. 

Philadelphia to Bal- 
timore. 

Philadelphia to New 
York. 

....do 

Philadelphia to BostoD 

Philadelphia to Prov- 
idence. 



Barge rate. 1 



$2 per thousand 
feet. 

85 cents to $1 per 
ton. 

11 to 12 cents per 
tie. 

95 cents to $1 per 
ton. 

$1.80 per cord 

$lto $1.25 per ton.. 

60 cents per ton 

85 cents to $1 per 
ton. 

....do 

65 to 75 cents per 
ton. 

55 to 60 cents per 
ton. 



Equivalent rail- 
road rate. 

$3. 15 per thousand 
feet. 

$1.60 per ton 

15| cents per tie . . . 

$1.95 per ton 

$3.85 per cord 

$1.60 per ton 

$1.20 per ton 

$1.90 per ton 

$1.85 per ton 

$2.65 per ton 

$2.70 per ton 



Actual railroad 
rate. 



$1.80 per 2,000 

pounds. 
$1.60 per 2,000 

pounds. 
9 cents per 100 

pounds. 
$1.95 per 2,240 

pounds. 
$2.20 per 2,000 

pounds. 
$1.60 per 2,000 

pounds. 
$1.20 per 2,000 

pounds. 
$1.90 per 2,000 

pounds. 
$1.85 per ton. 
$2.65 per ton. 

$2.70 per ton. 



1 Barge rates between Philadelphia and eastern points via outside route; between Philadelphia and 
southern points via inside route. 

2 Railroad coal rate from Shamokin, Schuylkill district. 

It is estimated that a 1,000-ton barge, loading 75 per cent capacity cargo (750 tons), 
can be profitably operated through the proposed free ship waterway across the State 
of New Jersey between Philadelphia and New York at an average rate of freight of 
45 cents per ton of 2,000 bounds. (See Exhibit A, Appendix C.) 

In like manner, a 2,000-ton barge, loading 60 per cent capacity cargo (1,200 tons), 
could be operated at an average freight rate of 35 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds. (See 
Exhibit B, Appendix C.) 

Terminal charges are not embraced in the above freight rates. 

It is estimated that availing of the most modern, comprehensive, up-to-date loading 
and discharging facilities, 25 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds would cover the handling 
of cargo into and out of barges, divided 10 cents per ton for loading and 15 cents per 
ton for discharging. This would make the total transportation charges payable by the 
shipper 60 to 70 cents per ton. 

Barges operated as above, it is estimated, would net their owners respectively 23.2 
per cent and 20.8 per cent per annum upon the capital invested. 

The principal saving to the shipper using the proposed canal would be on freight 
which can be delivered direct at industrial wharves or which, if shipped by rail, 
would require cartage. In the former case the cartage charge is eliminated, and in 
the latter it would be no less than on freight hauled to and from the water front. At 
present barge rates and cartage charges, barge transportation, in most instances, affords 
little if any saving to the shippers who have private rail sidings. However, it is 
estimated that barge rates through the proposed canal will be lower than existing rates 
by water. There is a large amount of freight at the present time that is not handled 
over private railway sidings, as is shown by the large cartage business at the ports and 
much that is handled to and from industrial wharves. 



PROBABLE TRAFFIC THROUGH THE PROPOSED CANAL. 



The traffic using the proposed canal will consist largely of coal, lumber of all kinds, 
building materials, iron and steel, petroleum, pottery, textiles, leather, tobacco, 
hardware, machinery, fertilizers, cotton, phosphate, naval stores, fruit, vegetables 
and other farm and garden products, and general merchandise or package freight. 

A careful study of the existing sources of traffic indicates that there would be 
shipped per annum through the canal, during the early years of its operation, at 
least — 

Tons. 

Freight other than coal and lumber 1, 250, 000 

Coal 3,400,000 

Lumber 550, 000 

Total 5,200,000 

22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 12 



178 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



This is probably an unduly conservative estimate. The tonnage assumed for coal 
is only 20 per cent of the shipments by water in 1910 from the ports Norfolk to Phila- 
delphia, inclusive. The lumber tonnage taken is 50 per cent of the receipts by water 
of southern pine at New York and Boston. No allowance is made for southern lumber 
that will be shipped through the proposed canal to cities between Trenton and New 
York. 

The use made of any canal will depend upon the existence of adequate terminal 
facilities. Fortunately, the harbor facilities now existing or provided for by plans 
under consideration by the cities of New York, Newark, Trenton, and Philadelphia 
indicate that the canal will not be hampered by inadequate arrangements for receiv- 
ing, handling, and discharging cargo at the ports. 

PROBABLE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED CANAL UPON RAILWAY AND COASTWISE TRAFFIC 

AND UPON INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. 

While the cost of transportation through the proposed canal and the rates charged 
those who ship by that waterway will be considerably less than present railway freight 
rates, it is not probable that the canal will seriously interfere with the traffic or the 
profits of the railways. The canal will undoubtedly develop new traffic as the result 
of the industrial development of the territory served, and also as a medium for reach- 
ing distant points, and the consequences will be favorable to the railroads as well as 
to the shipping and commercial interests within the zone of the canal's influence. 
The addition of a waterway to existing railway facilities seldom if ever decreases the 
total traffic handled by_ the railroads; instead, as experience has shown, it tends to 
create traffic for the railroads, and particularly traffic in those classes of goods from 
which the railroads derive the highest freight-rate profits. 

It is the opinion of the committee that a canal connecting Delaware and New York 
Bays and capable of accommodating barges of 1,000 to 3,000 tons burden would be 
actively used by companies now operating barges by the outside route between Phila- 
delphia and New England points. An ideal route for such barges between Chesa- 
peake Bay and Boston would be afforded by an enlarged Chesapeake & Delaware 
Canal, the proposed waterway between the Delaware and New York Bays, and canals 
connecting Long Island Sound with the port of Boston. An inside waterway between 
North Carolina and New England would increase the volume of coastwise commerce, 
and, what is hardly less important, would minimize the losses of property and human 
lives caused by shipwrecks. This safe inside route would be used by a type of craft 
that can be operated with economy and with certain profit to the owners. One of the 
strongest arguments in favor of an inside route is the fact that in the single decade from 
1900 to 1909 there were over 5,700 disasters to shipping on our Atlantic seaboard. Not 
all losses are reported, but these accidents are known to have destroyed $40,500,000 
worth of vessels and cargo and to have caused the loss of over 2,200 human lives. 

In the following sections of this report a careful analysis is made of the industrial 
effects that would be produced by the construction of the proposed canal. The 
development resulting from this waterway will be similar to that which followed the 
opening of the Erie Canal at the beginning of the second quarter of the last century. 
It is believed by the people of New York State that the enlargement of the Erie and 
Champlain Canals will again cause those waterways to enhance the industrial progress 
of the Empire State. The industrial influence actually exerted during the last two 
or three decades by the Finow Canal and the canalized River Main in Germany are 
illustrated by two maps, which accompany this report. These maps show that there 
has been a large development of manufacturing industries along those waterways, 
neither one of which possesses an industrial location comparable with that of the 
proposed waterway between Philadelphia and New York. 

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS. 

The type of canal that should be constructed and the depth and width that should 
be given the waterway aie questions to be largely determined by the Engineer Corps 
of the United States Army with reference to the requirements of commerce and of 
the Navy. A sea-level canal would be preferable to one with locks, and the dimen- 
sions of the waterway should be at least as great as those of the enlarged Erie and 
Champlain Canals. For both commercial and naval reasons, greater dimensions 
would probably be advisable. 

The Army engineers estimate that the cost of a sea-level canal between New York 
and Philadelphia, with a bottom width of 125 feet and a depth of 18 feet, will be 
$35,250,000. This is less than the value of the property lost along the Atlantic sea- 
board by shipwrecks during the last 10 years. This annual toll of lives and property 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 179 



still continues to be levied. Within a few months past three barges, laden with coal 
and 17 men, were lost in a storm off the coast of Massachusetts. 

A canal connecting the New York and Delaware Bays is a most important part of 
the Atlantic coastal waterway. The Philadelphia-New York Canal will undoubtedly 
benefit the eastern part of the United States. The project merits the support of the 
National Government and of the States and municipalities most directly interested. 

Emory R. Johnson, Chairman. 

Wilfred H. Schoff, Secretary. 

George F. Sproule. 

N. B. Kelly. 

Frank L. Neall. 

E. R. Sharwood. 

H. F. Stetser. 

J. Hampton Moore, ex officio. 



I. Approximate Amount of Water Traffic of North Atlantic Seaboard. 

It is impossible to state precisely the volume of coastwise trade between ports 
adjacent to the proposed canal, because coastwise vessels are not required to enter 
and clear at the customhouse or to report their cargo tonnage. The available figures, 
however, show that the coastwise shipments of the North Atlantic are of large volume. 
The United States Census of 1906 shows that the total shipments from the leading 
ports, extending from Bangor, Me., to Newbern, N. C, aggregated 33,263,000 tons of 
freight. The total receipts at the same ports amounted to 42,704,000 tons. The com- 
modities specified by the census are coal, cement, brick and lime, lumber, stone, 
sand and gravel, petroleum and other oils, -fruits and vegetables, ice, phosphate and 
fertilizers, pig iron and steel rails, grain, naval stores, canned goods, flour, cotton, 
iron ore, tobacco, and general merchandise. The shipments and receipts at each of 
23 adjacent ports are shown in the accompanying table. (Table I.) 

Table I. — Receipts and shipments of leading ports adjacent to the proposed canal. 

[Bureau of the Census, 1906.] 



Ports. 



New York 

Philadelphia 

Baltimore 

Boston 

Norfolk and Newport News 

Providence 

New Haven 

Fall River 

Washington 

Portsmouth 

Wilmington Del 

Jersey City 

New Bedford 

Hoboken 

Newark 

Perth Amboy 

South Amboy 

New London 

Bangor , 

Portland , 

Rockland 

Wilmington, N. C , 

Total 



Shipments. 



Net tons. 
8, 598,374 
5, 213, 485 
3,579,407 
887,001 
7,680,230 
341,524 
161,666 
274,646 
92,910 
25,390 
95, 241 
186,982 
163,951 
552,348 
5,318 
1,463,185 
2,845,014 
240,305 
255,613 
303, 295 
175,904 
121,930 



33,263,719 



Receipts. 



Net tons. 
17,507,906 
2,721,456 
1, 858, 443 
6,533,573 
2,808,346 
2,749,511 
2, 156,814 
786,392 
599, 177 
362,820 
250, 188 
167,548 
581, 176 
43,774 
315,681 
398,883 
3,950 
887, 404 
319,546 
1,357,316 
149, 496 
145,209 



Total. 



Net tons. 
26, 106, 280 
7,934,941 
5,437,850 
7,420,574 
10,488,576 
3,091,035 
2,318,480 
1,061,038 
692,087 
388,210 
345, 429 
354,530 
745, 127 
596, 122 
320,999 
1,862,068 
2,848,964 
1,127,709 
575,159 
1,660,611 
325, 400 
267, 139 



42,704,609 



75,968,328 



180 IN TK AC OAST Alt WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Table II. — Total receipts and shipments of domestic commerce as reported by United States 

Engineers. 



Ports. 



1909 



Anacostia River 

Arthur Kill 

Baltimore 

Beverly 

Boston Harbor 

Beaufort 

Bridgeport 

Cape Charles City, Va 

Connecticut River (below Hartford) 

Elizabeth River, Va 

Greenwich Harbor 

Gloucester 

Havre de Grace 

Housatonic River 

Hyannis 

Lynn 

Mispillion River, Del 

Nansemond River, Va 

Nantucket 

New Bedford 

New Haven 

Newburyport 

New London 

Newport News 

Newport Harbor 

Newtown Creek. 

New York 

Norfolk 

Norwalk Harbor 

Passaic River 

Pawtucket River 

Philadelphia 

Portland, Me 

Providence 

Raritan Bay 

Rappahannock River 

Richmond and James River Point. . 

Roanoke River, N. C 

Sakonnet Harbor 

Stamford Harbor 

St. Jones River, Del 

Smyrna River 

Taunton River 

Thames River 

Woods Hole, Mass 

Washington 

Wilmington, Del 

Wilmington, N. C 

Total 



Tons. 

450,213 
9,504 



1 8, 415 
196 
• 24, 478 
52 
1,117 
2, 355 
614 
1,861 
79 
218 

( 3 ) 
81 
8 
359 
187 
96 
28 
1,392 
2,019 
212 
707 
7, 268 
239 
5,113 
' 25, 509 
10,972 
222 
2,650 
475 
19, 402 
2,956 
3,814 
5,333 
397 
476 
68 
7 

264 
113 
203 
126 
497 
43 
1,430 
805 
872 



090 
220 
203 
668 
396 
131 
984 
780 
402 
727 
165 

485 
832 
195 
356 
251 
550 
802 
198 
029 
768 
585 
923 
628 
733 
999 
787 
809 
255 
199 
011 
982 
676 
210 
465 
113 
385 
615 
550 
580 
509 
725 
032 
788 
447 
426 



143, 704, 877 



1 Baltimore: Vessel tonnage. 

2 Boston: Vessel tonnage. Cargo tonnage data not given. 

3 Asked for but not obtained. 

4 New York figures include only outlying bays and rivers, omitting Hudson and East Rivers, where 
most of the traffic is located. The items included are not the same for 1906 and 1909 and neither total can 
be compared with that given by the Census. 

5 Not available. 



The census statistics of coastwise cargoes are in some respects too low and do not 
include a sufficient number of ports. For these reasons Table II was compiled from 
the returns of the United States War Department, for ports extending from Bangor to 
Newbern. It indicates an approximate total at 48 points for the year 1909 of 143,000,- 
000 tons, and in 1906, the census year, of 139,000,000 tons. These aggregates comprise 
both shipments and receipts. The reports of the Engineer Corps include only those 
waterways for the improvement of which appropriations have been made by Congress. 
They include, however, numerous places not counted as ports in the census and the 
basis of tabulation is not the same; so that the two totals can not strictly be compared. 

Coastwise shipments of coal and lumber are further indicated in the reports of the 
United States Bureau of Statistics. From the following table (Table III) it is seen 
that in 1910 approximately 17,290,147 tons of anthracite and 26,121,224 tons of bitumin- 
ous coal, a total of 43,411,371 tons were shipped by water from the five leading ports — 
New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Norfolk, and Newport News. These figures 
include coal for the use of vessels in the domestic trade, and therefore differ widely 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 181 



from those of the Bureau of the Census. Shipments from New York include those from 
adjacent ports on New York Bay. New England ports are particularly heavy receivers 
of this coal, the Boston Chamber of Commerce reporting that in 1909 Boston alone 
received 1,668,126 tons of anthracite and 3,393,423 tons of bituminous coal by sea. The 
United States Bureau of Corporations estimated that New England ports received 
16,752,053 tons of coal by water in 1905, and 14,236,920 tons in 1906. 



Table III. — Shipments of coal by water. 



Port. 


Anthracite. 


Bitumin- 
ous. 


Total. 




15,036, 622 
1, 980, 830 
272, 695 


11, 289, 095 
4, 700, 174 
3, 780, 120 
3, 534, 134 
2,817,120 


26, 325, 717 
6, 681.004 
4, 052, 815 
3, 534, 134 
2, 817, 701 


Philadelphia 










Total 




17, 290, 147 


26, 121, 224 


43, 411,371 





The 4,256,000 tons of lumber which the Bureau of the Census reports as having been 
shipped from and received at ports tributary to the proposed canal may be supple- 
mented with the data of the Bureau of Statistics. This bureau reports that in 1909, 
133,146,700 feet of southern lumber were received at Boston by water, and 486,660,800 
feet of southern pine at New York. It reports that 68,186,000 feet of pine were shipped 
from the ports of Virginia and the Carolinas immediately south of the proposed canal ; 
and in 1907 these shipments aggregated 128,957,900 feet. The Board of Commissioners 
of Navigation report the annual coastwise lumber receipts of Philadelphia at 226,717,318 
feet, and the Lumbermen's Exchange presents an even larger figure. 

The Board of Commissioners of Navigation prepared for the use of the committee an 
itemized statement of the tonnage of the port of Philadelphia for the year ending 
December 31, 1910. These statistics do not permit the computation of a total, but are 
of interest in that they indicate particular items. The following table (Table IV) 
shows the principal cargoes landed by vessels other than regular-line steamers. 

Table IV. 



Items. 



Receipts via Delaware 
and Raritan and 
Chesapeake and Del- 
aware Canals. 



Amount. 



Equiva- 
lent in 
tons. 



Receipts via Delaware 
Capes. 



Amount. 



Equiva- 
lent in 
tons. 



Total 
(equiva- 
lent in 
tons). 



Lumber 

Railroad ties . . . 

Sand 

Bricks 

Pig iron 

Mine props 

Salt 

Pulp wood 

Cinders 

Oak staves 

Piling 

Chestnut poles. . 

Logs 

Scrap iron 

Wood blocks 

Phosphate rock. 

Shingles 

Oil 

Stone 

Asphaltum 

Coal tar 

Sulphur 

Plaster 

Feldspar 



.feet, 
.tons. 



tons. 

...do... 
.bushels. 
...cords. 
tons. 



.tons. 



.tons, 
.do... 
.do... 



121,005,483 
885,354 
10, 401 
460, 000 
49, 099 
60,555 
49, 000 
19, 752 
10, 055 
50, 000 
1,075 
52,000 
2,416 
1,300 
1, 150 
563 



.bbls. 
.tons, 
.bbls. 
.do... 
.tons, 
.do... 



211,758 
64, 151 
10, 401 

1,035 
49, 099 
60,555 

1,715 
34, 566 
10, 055 
89 

1,075 



1,300 
1, 150 
563 



105, 781, 835 
1,701,861 
0) 

460, 000 
0) 

W 

3,697 
0) 
( l ) 
( l ) 

0) 

4,800 

ft) 
14,219 
3, 600, 000 
3,099,981 
21,350 
20,700 
38,000 
5,800 
5,825 
3,080 



184, 996 
127, 639 



1,035 



3, 697 



4,800 



14, 219 
1,620 
619, 996 
21,350 
3,105 
5,700 
5,800 
5,825 
3,080 



396, 754 
191,790 
10, 401 
2,070 
49, 099 
60,555 
1,715 
34,566 
13.752 
89 
1,075 



( 2 ) 
( 2 ) 



6, 100 
1,150 
14,782 
1,620 
619,996 
21,350 
3, 105 
5,700 
5,800 
5,825 
3,080 



1 Amounts not stated. 



; Weight not known. 



182 I N TRAC AST AL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The coastwise tonnage, receipts, and shipments of Philadelphia in regular line 
steamers are estimated as shown in Table V. 

Table V. — Water traffic tonnage, estimated. 



PORT OF PHILADELPHIA. 

Tons. 

Norfolk 200, 000 

Savannah 400,000 

Boston . 450,000 

Providence and Fall River 200, 000 

Baltimore, via canal 400, 000 

New York and outside route 750, 000 

Charleston and Jacksonville 150, 000 

Tampa 50,000 

New Orleans 70, 000 



Total 2,675,000 

WITHIN THE DELAWARE CAPES. 

Upper Delaware 100, 000 

Wilmington, Wilson Line 70, 000 

Bush Line 70,000 

Chester Freighjt Line 100, 000 

Salem & Philadelphia Navigation Co 15, 000 

City of Salem 40, 000 

Smyrna 12,000 

Roeblings 50,000 

Van Sciver 20, 000 

Odessa 10,000 

Lebanon ' 10,000 

Atlantic City 10, 000 

Milford 10,000 

Frederica 10, 000 

Pennsgrove 20,000 



Total 547,000 



Grand total 3,222,000 



Table VI. — Coal shipments of Philadelphia to coastivise ports, 1909 and 1910. 



The coal shipments of Philadelphia to coastwise ports in 1909 and 1910 are stated 
by the Board of Commissioners of Navigation as follows: 



Items (per ton). 


Coastwise ports. 


Within Delaware 
Capes. 


Total. 


1910 


1909 


1910 


1909 


1910 


1909 


Total anthracite 


1, 192, 163 
1, 661, 369 


1,292, 667 
1, 638, 201 


513, 875 
966, 144 


473,749 
1, 889, 010 


1,706, 038 
2, 627, 513 


1,766,416 
3,527,211 




Grand total 


2, 853, 532 


2, 930, 868 


1,480,019 


2,362,759 


4,333,558 


5,293,627 





It is also reported that in 1910, 362,196,361 gallons of oil were shipped from Point 
Breeze and Marcus Hook. 

The amount of coastwise traffic is further indicated by the number and tonnage 
of the vessels in which it is carried. 



1NTRAC0ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 183 
Table VII. — All vessels and craft of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, 1906. 



Class. 



Freight and passenger (steam) 
Freight and passenger (sail) 1 . 

Unrigged craft 

Tugs and towing vessels 

Ferryboats 

Yachts (steam) 

Yachts (sail) 

All other 

Total i 

Schooner barges 



Number 
of vessels, 



1,523 
4,227 
8,699 
1,690 
270 
1,577 
1,358 



20.032 
389 



Gross 
tonnage. 



1,045,811 
1,105,901 
2,260,622 
148,992 
162,834 
70,461 
21,046 
35,754 



Value of 
vessels. 



4,851,421 
323,618 



$121,136,485 
33,213,849 
41,658,685 
25,894,551 
19, 970, 466 
21,290,339 
3,775,743 
6, 165, 797 



273,105,915 
7,497,833 



1 Including schooner barges. 



Table VII, compiled from the report of the Bureau of the Census, shows that in 
1906 there were 20,032 vessels, documented and undocumented, with a gross tonnage 
of 4,851,421 tons, engaged in carrying freight and passengers to and from the ports of 
the Altantic and Gulf coasts. The capital invested in them aggregated over 
$273,000,000. As compared with the vessel situation of 1889, as shown by the Bureau 
of the Census, the number of vessels increased from 12,238, or 63.7 per cent, gross 
tonnage from 2,658,455, or 82.5 per cent, and the value of the vessels from $116,042,062, 
or 135.4 per cent. 

The documented tonnage engaged in the trade of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts is 
annually reported by the United States Commissioner of Navigation. Table VIII, 
compiled from this report, shows a total of 17,203 vessels with a gross tonnage of 
3,500,394 tons, and an increase of 95 per cent in the tonnage since 1889. 



Table VIII. — Enrolled and licensed vessels, over 20 tons, of Atlantic and Gulf coasts . 



Year. 


Total. 


Sail.i 


Steam. 


Number. 


Gross 
tonnage. 


Number. 


Gross 
tonnage. 


Number. 


Gross 
tonnage. 


1909 


17,203 
16,763 
15,742 
16,247 
16,214 
16,261 


3,500,394 
2,763,866 
2,190,552 
2,033,367 
1,917,041 
1,786,005 


11,108 
12,500 
12,516 
13,190 
13,504 
13,522 


1,841,101 
1,670,105 
1,323,958 
1,240,148 
1,226,208 
1,112,649 


6,095 
4,263 
3,226 
3,057 
2,710 
2,739 


1,659,293 
1,093,761 
866,594 
793,219 
690,833 
673,416 


1905 


1900 


1895 


1890 


1889 





1 Including barges and canal boats. 

- • 

The reports of the Commissioner of Navigation further show that 15,966 vessels were, 
in 1909, documented at the ports adjacent to the proposed canal; 7,132 of these vessels 
were sailing vessels, 5,679 steam vessels, and 3,155 barges and canal boats, and their 
aggregate gross tonnage was 3,862,000 tons. 



184 INTRACOASTAL WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Table IX. — Documented 1 vessels of ports adjacent to proposed canal (1909). 





Sailing 


vessels. 


Steam 


vessels. 


canal 


boats. 


Total. 


Ports of— 






Num- 
ber. 














Number. 


Tons. 


Tons. 


Number. 
# 


Tons. 


Number. 


Tons. 


Maine 


1,007 


201,539 


459 


66 , 555 


12 


5, 389 


1,478 


273,483 


New Hampshire 


12 


1,648 


9 


588 


13 


1,341 


34 


3,577 


Vermont 


5 


353 


8 


2,901 


7 


716 


20 


3,970 




7^n 
/ ou 






lift ^QJ. 


zo 


ft 1 fU 
Oj 101 


1,276 


340, 551 




64 


9,037 


217 


13,933 


7 


1,602 


288 


24,572 


Connectiefit 


253 


55, 557 


347 


84, 885 


151 


45.154 


751 


185,596 




1,033 


278, 846 


2,299 


1, 326,328 


3,294 


529, 777 


1,726 


2,134,951 




217 


127,779 


518 


197,712 


167 


64,574 


902 


390, 065 




646 


59, 057 


288 


25,361 


205 


55, 389 


1,139 


139, 807 


Delaware 


95 


13,282 


50 


20,678 


14 


4,955 


159 


38,915 


Maryland ". 


1,441 


72,906 


303 


123, 570 


111 


28,670 


1,855 


225,146 


District of Columbia. . . 


22 


2,U0 


39 


14,795 






61 


16,965 


Virginia 


1,115 


28,211 


394 


26, 762 


34 


13,690 


1,543 


68,663 


North Carolina 


472 


7,248 


245 


7,576 


17 


1,091 


734 


15,915 


Total 


7,132 


1,073,629 


9,679 


2,028,038 


3,155 


760, 509 


15,966 


3,862,176 



1 Including registered tonnage. 

It is not feasible to tabulate the detailed vessel data for all ports of the North Atlantic, 
but those of New York and Philadelphia may be analyzed to show the nature of the 
vessels engaged in the coastwise trade. Table X shows that at the end of the fiscal 
year 1910 the enrolled and licensed fleet of the port of New York comprised 3,536 
vessels with a gross tonnage of 1,266,246 tons, distributed among the various classes of 
vessels as follows : 



Table X. — Documented tonnage at New York (June 30, 1910). 



Enrolled vessels. 



Number. 



Gross tons. 



Permanently enrolled: 

Sailing vessels (wood) 

Steam vessels (wood) 

Canal boats (wood) 

Barges (wood) 

Sailing vessels (metal) 

Steam vessels (metal) 

Barges (metal) 

Temporarily enrolled: 

Sailing vessels (wood) 

Steam vessels (wood) 

Canal boats (wood) 

Barges (wood) 

Barges (steel) 

Steam vessels (metal) „ . 

Total 

Licensed vessels, under 20 tons . . 
Registered vessels (foreign trade) 

Grand total 1 



389 
647 

44 
1,499 

21 
362 

32 

25 
6 
1 
9 
3 
9 



180,189 
122,140 
6,558 
411.910 

32,985 
422,061 

15,874 

14,142 
649 
113 

2,524 
936 
28,888 



3,047 
489 
107 



1,258.969 
7,277 
336,789 



3, 643 



1,603,035 



1 Excluding yachts and house boats. 

The entire fleet comprises 536 sailing vessels with a gross tonnage of 246,270 tons; 
1,500 steam vessels, gross tonnage, 915,516; 45 canal boats, gross tonnage, 6,671; and 
1,562 barges with a gross tonnage of 434,578 tons. All but 81 of the sailing vessels have a 
gross tonnage of less than 1,000 tons each, and all but 5 less than 2,500 tons. All but 
220 of the steam vessels have a gross tonnage of less than 1,000 tons each, and all but 
121 are of less than 2,500 tons. Barges are not specified as to their size, but their 
average gross tonnage is 278 tons. It appears that the great majority of even the 
steam and sailing vessels documented at New York are not excluded from the proposed 
canal by their dimensions. 

The itemized account of the fleet documented at Philadelphia is shown in Table XI. 



TRAFFIC OF LEADING COASTWISE CANALS. 





































DELAWARE &. RAR/TAN. 
CHESAPEAKE tkDELMME. 


































































































































-L 


M 


M 


> 






















































5 — 
4 — 


















L { 




m 


9 




































a — 




























































1 




























































s — 




























































a — 




























































5 — 




























































Q JZ 




























































,± 






























































\ 




























































5 




























































6 




























































S 


























































































































s — 




















T 




7S 












\ 










* 


* 






k 



































































5 — 




























































— 


































sS 


























s — 




























































— 




























































5 — 





















































































































































































o — 
























































































































— 




























































5 — 




























































c 




























































s 



























































































































k 

k 



0) 
Q 





izao 



I89S 



1990 



1695 



!90C 



(90* 



1910 



THE .VOR/?/S °£TE RS CO . WASH t NGTOT1 . O. C 



Mouse Dec No. 39/ ; 6 2d Cong., 2d Sess. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 185 
Table XI. — Documented tonnage of Philadelphia {June 30, 1910). 





rirnoo Otitic 


148 


100, 973 


89 


11,659 


148 


53,848 


6 


4,788 


115 


63, 456 


11 


9,090 


9 


5,306 


1 


83 


4 


967 


2 


561 


1 


2,128 


2 


4,001 


536 


256, 860 


104 


2.001 


15 


28i 093 


655 


286,954 



Enrolled vessels. 



Permanently enrolled: 

Sailing vessels (wood) 

Steam vessels (wood) 

Barges (wood) 

Sailing vessels (metal) 

Steam vessels (metal) 

Barges (metal) 

Temporarily enrolled: 

Sailing vessels (wood) 

Steam vessels (wood) 

Barges (wood). 

Barges (metal) 

Sailing vessels (metal) 

Steam vessels (metal) 

Total 

Licensed vessels 

Registered vessels (foreign trade) 

Grand total 1 



1 Excluding yachts. 

The fleet consists of 198 sailing vessels of 116,956 gross tonnage, 286 steam vessels of 
104,313 tons, and 171 barges of 65,685 tons. The entire coastwise fleet comprises 640 
vessels with a gross tonnage of 258,861 tons. All but 18 of the entire sailing fleet and 
all but 20 of the steam fleet have a gross tonnage of less than 1,000 tons each. None of 
the sailing vessels and but 6 of the steamers have a gross tonnage of 2,500 tons or over, 
and the average tonnage of the barge fleet is 384 tons. 

It should be noted that the foregoing figures do not include undocumented tonnage. 
At the port of New York are many thousand lighters and floats used for harbor work. 
These craft are not enrolled. They would not be much used for canal traffic except 
to and from points located upon the canal near its termini; hence they need not be con- 
sidered in this analysis. 

The large coastwise traffic of the North Atlantic is at present dependent but slightly 
upon canals. The following chart graphically shows the decline in tonnage of the 
Delaware & Raritan from 1,348,000 tons in 1880 to 401,231 in 1909, and of the Chesa- 
peake & Delaware from 959,146 tons in 1880 to 818,386 in 1909. Yet it is significant 
that in spite of the inadequate dimensions of these two canals they still handle 1,219,617 
tons of freight annually. The traffic of the Delaware & Raritan consists mainly of 
coal, sand, brick, and stone, iron, lumber, clay, oil, coke, and general merchandise, 
and that of the Chesapeake & Delaware chiefly of lumber, coal, sand and stone, 
railroad ties, iron, fertilizers, and general merchandise. Though these waterways do 
not indicate the amount of freight which would pass through a large and improved 
canal, they show that certain quantities of bulky freight will seek even an inadequate 
inland waterway in preference to the more dangerous open-sea route or the more 
expensive railroad transportation. 

II. Railroad Traffic Between Points Adjacent to the Proposed Waterway. 

The rail carriers do not at present report then tonnage statistics in such a way as to 
show the movement between given points, and thus the rail traffic moving between 
places on the north and middle Atlantic coast can not be accurately stated. The 
data of the Interstate Commerce Commission are classified by groups or divisions of 
territory. Group I includes New England; Group II, New York, Pennsylvania, 
Delaware, and New Jersey; and Group IV, Virginia, West Virginia, North and South 
Carolina. Within these three districts the railways in 1909 carried 573,902,548 tons, 
including freight received from connecting lines. The tonnage originating within 
these districts is not separately stated. For the entire country, however, the origi- 
nated tonnage is 56.6 per cent of the total, including freight received from connecting 
lines; and, at this rate, it would be approximately 324,828,000 tons in the coast States 
from South Carolina to Maine. 

The annual report of the Pennsylvania Railroad for 1909, furthermore, states the 
total freight tonnage of the New Jersey division as 34,199,226 tons. The annual report 
of the Philadelphia & Reading does not separate the tonnage of the Central Railroad 
of New Jersey from that of the entire system, but the Interstate Commerce Commission 



186 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



reports its freight revenue for 1909 at $16,588,966. The average receipts per ton of 
freight in Group II are $0,842, and at that rate the freight tonnage of the Central Rail- 
road of New Jersey is approximately 19,702,000 tons. The annual tonnage of the two 
railways operating in the territory of the proposed waterway is, therefore, approxi- 
mately 53,901,000 tons. 

The greatest portion of this traffic, however, moves to and from the ports and points 
in the interior, and between interior points, and not between coastwise points. As is 
shown in the table on next page, the largest items in the traffic of the New Jersey 
division of the Pennsylvania Railroad are coal, lumber, stone and sand, cement, brick, 
and lime, bar and sheet metal, castings and machinery, fruits and vegetables, pig and 
bloom iron and coke. The bulk of this traffic goes to the coastwise points direct from 
the interior or is shipped to certain ports by rail and is there transshipped by water. 
Available rail traffic statistics do not, therefore, indicate the rail movement between the 
ports of the North Atlantic. 

The statements furnished to the committee by the Pennsylvania Railroad and the 
Philadelphia & Reading Railway as to their traffic between Philadelphia and New 
York City do not lessen the dearth of statistics to any great extent. The data supplied 
by the Pennsylvania Railroad refer to certain specified articles, and the figures sub- 
mitted by both railroads include only traffic originating at Philadelphia and New 
York City. The approximate total traffic reported upon by the two railroads — the 
classified freight of the Pennsylvania Railroad being estimated — amounts to about 
247,000 tons. The special commodities which the Pennsylvania Railroad reported 
upon are grain, mill products, animal products, lumber, oils, and petroleum products, 
sugar, castings and machinery, bar and sheet metal, cement, brick, and lime. The 
Philadelphia & Reading Railway reported its Philadelphia-New York tonnage to con- 
sist almost entirely of classified freight. 

Table XII. — Classification of freight traffic, New Jersey division, Pennsylvania R. R., 

excluding Delaware & Raritan Canal. 



Products of agriculture: Tons - 

Grain 422,548 

Flour 254, 916 

Other mill products 150, 396 

Hay 177,985 

Tobacco 27, 164 

Cotton 65,070 

Fruits and vegetables 790, 456 

Other articles 219, 530 

Products of animals: 

Livestock 248,221 

Dressed meats 154, 635 

Other packing-house products 74, 574 

Poultry, game, and fish 84, 858 

Wool 26, 187 

Hides and leather 132, 795 

Other articles 118,032 

Products of mines: 

Anthracite coal 5, 245, 714 

Bituminous coal 11,891,601 

Coke . 596,824 

Ores 127,366 

Stone, sand, and like articles 1, 758, 989 

Other articles 254, 248 

Products of forests: 

Lumber 2, 028, 832 

Other articles 160, 672 

Manufactures: 

Petroleums and other oils 346, 635 

Sugar 214,476 

Naval stores 26, 258 

Iron, pig and bloom 738, 925 

Iron and steel rails 203, 129 

Castings and machinery 825, 502 

Bar and sheet metal 927, 616 

Cement, brick, and lime 1> 156, 801 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 187 



Manufactures — Continued. Tons. 

Agricultural implements 23, 466 

Wagons, carriages, tools, etc 117, 387 

Wines, liquors, and beers 94, 718 

Household goods and furniture 39, 306 

Other articles 2, 668, 388 

Merchandise 416, 305 

Miscellaneous 1, 388, 701 



Total 34,199,226 



It is estimated further that 85 per cent of the rail shipments via New York and 
Philadelphia pass beyond these points to and from southern and New England points. 
This would bring the total rail shipments between Philadelphia and New York City 
to approximately 1,632,000 tons. If the rail shipments between New Jersey points 
and Philadelphia and New York and between New Jersey points reached by the 
proposed canal amount to two-thirds of the through shipments, or aggregate 1,000,000 
tons, the grand total would be 2,632,000 tons. 

These figures do not tally with the well-known volume of business. If they were a 
complete measure of the rail tonnage they would indicate that the two great railroads 
between the points reached by the proposed waterway handle a smaller traffic than is 
at present shipped by water. 

III. Production in the Territory Adjacent to the Proposed Canal. 

The sections adjacent to the proposed waterway comprise the leading manufacturing 
districts of the United States. While not all of this production, nor even the major 
share of it, is available for shipment through the canal, the vast manufacturing indus- 
tries nevertheless constitute one of the large sources of the traffic of the canal. Table 
XIII, compiled from the reports of the United States Bureau of the Census, shows 
that in 1905 there were in the aggregate 97,733 manufacturing establishments in the 
States adjacent to the proposed canal, having a total capitalization of $7,007,153,000, 
3,025,000 wage earners, materials valued at $4,332,000,000, and finished products 
valued at $7,671,000,000. 



Table XIII. — Total manufactures, 1905. 



State. 


Establish- 
ments. 


Capital 
(thousands). 


Wage earners. 


Cost of 
materials used 
(thousands). 


Value of 
products 
(thousands). 




7,010 


$715, 060 


266,336 


$470,449 


$774,369 




37,194 


2,031,460 


856, 947 


1,348,603 


2,488,346 




23,495 


1,995,837 


763, 282 


1,142,943 


1,955,551 




3,145 


143, 708 


74,958 


80,042 


144,020 


New Hampshire 


1,618 


109,495 


65,366 


73,216 


123,611 


Vermont 


1,699 


62, 659 


33,106 


32,430 


63,084 


Massachusetts 


10,723 


965,949 


488, 399 


626,410 


1, 124, 092 


Connecticut 


3,477 


373,284 


181,605 


191,302 


369, 082 


Rhode Island 


1,617 


215, 901 


97,318 


112,872 


202, 110 


Delaware 


631 


50,926 


18,475 


24,884 


41,160 


Maryland 


3,852 


201,878 


94,174 


150,024 


243,376 


North Carolina 


3,272 


141,001 


85,339 


79,268 


142,521 




97, 733 


7, 007, 158 


3,025,305 


4,332,443 


7,671,322 



To narrow this vast production down to the seaboard districts exclusively, Table 
XIV was constructed. It shows that in the leading ports from Bangor, Me., to New- 
bern, N. C, there were 40,196 manufacturing establishments in 1905, with a total 
capital of $2,667,914,000; 1,151,146 wage earners, materials valued at $1,824,084,000; 
and finished products valued at $3,306,911,000. 



188 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 
Table XIV. — Total manufactures of leading cities influenced by proposed canal, 1905. 



City. 



Baltimore 

Bangor, Me 

Bayonne, N. J 

Boston 

Bridgeport, Conn. 

Camden, N. J 

Chester, Pa 

Elizabeth, N. J... 

Fall River 

Harrison, N. J 

Hoboken 

Jersey City 

Lynn, Mass 

Newark, N. J 

New Bedford 

Newbern, N. C. . . 
New Brunswick . . 

New Haven 

New London 

Newport News 

New York 

Norfolk 

Passaic 

Perth Amboy 

Philadelphia 

Plymouth 

Portland, Me 

Portsmouth 

Richmond 

Rockland, Me 

Salem, Mass 

Stamford 

Trenton 

Washington, D. C 
West Hoboken . . . 
Wilmington, Del. 
Wilmington, N. C 

Total 



Establish- 
ments. 



2, 163 
87 
58 
2, 747 
306 
298 
131 
124 
234 
41 
279 
628 
431 
1,600 
176 
21 
71 
490 
57 
25 
20, 839 
123 
95 
53 
7,087 
35 
243 
27 
281 
50 
143 
62 
312 
482 
95 
247 
55 



40, 196 



Capital 
(thousands). 



$148, 764 
2,944 
50,297 
131,563 
49, 381 
31, 992 
22, 070 
23,564 
69,375 
11,389 
11, 777 
82, 395 
23, 139 
119,026 
40,410 
1,233 
10,393 
31,413 
4, 590 
22,958 
1,042.946 
4, 576 
28,611 
11,583 
520, 179 
7,910 
6, 280 
2,631 
31,953 
2,382 
9,670 
7.526 
41 i 623 
20, 200 
6, 018 
33,227 
1,926 



Wage earners. 



2,667,914 



65, 224 
1,496 
7, 057 
59, 160 
19, 492 
12, 661 
7,061 
12, 335 
26, 836 
4,040 
7.227 
20,353 
21,540 
50, 697 
17, 855 
762 
4,590 
21,437 
2,554 
7,406 
464, 716 
3,063 
11,000 
3,950 
228, 899 
2,300 
4,345 
638 
12. 883 
949 
5,945 
3,341 
14, 252 
6,299 
3,562 
13, 554 
1,667 



1,151,146 



Cost Of 
materials 
(thousands). 



$81,014 
1,737 
46,984 
94, 603 
22,335 
20, 423 
10,422 
16, 982 
26, 096 
3,629 
6, 580 
48, 799 
32, 616 
80, 689 
16, 091 
675 
4, 158 
18,521 
2,527 
4,479 
818,029 
3,261 
13,110 
30,316 
333.352 
8,568 
4,354 
888 
13,102 
951 
7,921 
2,330 
17, 692 
7,732 
3,122 
18, 173 
1,823 



1,824, 084 



Value of 
products 
(thousands). 



$151,547 

3,408 
60, 634 
184,351 
44,587 
33, 587 
16, 645 
29,301 
43,473 

8,409 
14,077 
75, 741 
55,003 
150, 055 
29,469 

1,343 

8,917 
39, 666 

4, 710 

9,054 
1,526,523 

5,900 
22, 783 
34, 800 
591,388 
11,116 

9,133 

2,602 
28,203 

1,823 
12. 202 

5,890 
32,720 
18,359 

5,947 
30,390 

3,155 



3,306,911 



The value of the leading products manufactured in the States adjacent to the pro- 
posed canal is shown in Table XV. The iron and steel, glass, foundry, and machine- 
shop products, electrical machinery, chemicals, cars, and shop construction, boots 
and shoes, leather, malt liquors, lumber and timber products, petroleum, pottery, 
terra-cotta and fire-clay products, slaughtering and meat-packing products, textiles, 
tobacco products, wire, brick and tile, clothing, flour and grist, furniture, sugar and 
molasses, paper and wood pulp, structural iron, and lime and cement constitute an . 
imposing array of manufactures, many of which are suitable for shipment through ! j 
the proposed canal. i 

The region bordering the canal includes five of the greatest industrial districts of j 
the United States — those of New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Baltimore, and Provi- j 
dence. These districts include the main cities and also all others in their immediate \ \ 
vicinity, some of which are not ports and are therefore not included in Table XIV. ( 
As reported by the Bureau of the Census in 1905, they are among the 13 leading manu- \ 
facturing districts in the country, with a total capital of $2,843,748,451, and annual j 
products valued at $3,638,482,807. 




INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 189 



Table XV. — Leading manufactures of Atlantic Seaboard States. 

[In thousands of dollars.] 



State. 


Boots and 

shoes 
(leather). 


Cars and 
shop con- 
struction. 


Chemicals. 


Electric 
machinery. 


Foundry 
and 

machine- 
shop 

products. 


Glass. 


Iron and 
steel. 


New Jersey 

New York 


14,608 
34, 137 


d, oyy 

80,450 
22, 137 

5,752 
8,693 
2, 155 


15,427 
29,090 


lo, oUo 
26, 258 
35,348 


At KAfi 

4i, 04U 
119,651 
115,876 

O, 4o<5 

9, 172 
2, 768 
20,068 
16,339 
58,509 
4,767 
3,082 
3,184 
2,465 


27, 672 
4,029 


no Ray 

471,228 
29,862 

1, Dill 

12, 230 
4,859 
5,151 
i 908 

11,948 


Maryland 


1,011 
2,627 
1,280 
175 
144,291 
12,351 
22,426 
676 
186 


1,082 
490 


225 


704 
549 
738 
62 
1,333 




4,940 
5,435 
15,882 


Massachusetts 


6,349 
1,190 
1,600 
860 
2,444 


3,509 


New Hampshire 




150 






Vermont 








North Carolina 










Total 










240, 745 


143, 687 


62, 622 


102, 041 


400, 853 


41,537 


561,450 



State. 



New Jersey 

Pennsylvania. 

New York 

Delaware 

Maryland 

Virginia 

Connecticut 

Rhode Island . . . 
Massachusetts... 

Maine 

New Hampshire 

Vermont 

North Carolina.. 

Total 



Leather. 



21,495 
69, 428 
21,643 
10, 251 
1,911 
5,830 
875 
349 
33, 353 
2,500 
1,774 
342 
2, 662 



172,413 



Malt 
liquors. 



17,466 
34,864 
61,958 
760 
4,967 
1,201 
2,927 
2, 740 
11,081 



2,255 



140, 199 



Lumber 

and 
products. 



7,254 
53,571 
54,090 
687 
6,167 
17, 265 
4,590 
1,318 
12, 636 
20, 162 
9,007 
8,969 
19, 134 



214,850 



Flour and 
grist. 



5,469 
38,519 
54, 546 
1,537 
7,318 
13,832 
1,982 
1,134 
4,618 
3,932 
2,542 
3.206 
6,864 



145,499 



Furniture. 



1,404 
12,377 
28,111 



3,445 
803 
557 
45 
11,093 
377 
846 
1,533 
6,182 



66,773 



Lime and 
cement. 



3,173 
13,502 
3,766 



447 
1,317 

296 



401 
1,174 



266 



24,342 



State. 


Paper 
and wood 
pulp. 


Struc- 
tural ire* 
work. 


Sugar and 
molasses 
refining. 


Ferti- 
lizers. 


Petro- 
leum. 


Pottery, 
terra 
cotta, 

and fire 
clay. 


Slaugh- 
tering 
and meat 
packing. 


Smelting 

and 
refining 
copper. 


New Jersey 


5,043 
15,411 
37, 751 
1,905 
3,296 
3,034 
5,039 


4,365 
23,706 
19, 657 




5,652 
4,095 
2,082 

371 
6,632 
4,659 

943 


46, 609 
47,460 


11,717 
10, 759 
3,289 


17,238 
32,321 
73,218 
548 
6,701 
1,996 


62, 795 




37, 183 
116,439 




5,179 








842 
625 
348 
147 
2,692 




( 2 ) 


852 
77 
144 
















106 


Rhode Island 






2,499 
37,099 
648 




32,012 
22.951 
8^ 930 
3,831 




1,978 
66 




718 




Maine 








New Hampshire 












Vermont 




149 












North Carolina 




3,099 




106 


3 192 




Total 












139,203 


52, 382 


153,771 


29,577 


94,069 


27,662 


172, 460 


68,080 



1 Not made in rolling mills or steel works. 

2 Baltimore refineries not separately specified. 



3 Not including meat packing. 



190 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Table XV. — Leading manufactures of Atlantic Seaboard States — Continued. 



State. 


Textiles. 


Tobacco 
manufac- 
turers. 


Wire. 


Brick and 
tile. 


Clothing. 


Grand 
total by 
States. 


New Jersey 

Pennsylvania 


. 96,060 
188,432 
123, 668 


10,987 
40,897 
65,597 
161 
4,648 
10, too 
2,350 
358 
6,578 
450 
570 
127 
28,088 


11,1§4 

3,757 
13,039 


3,796 
7,280 
7,430 

205 
1,097 
1,8U4 

921 


8,614 
37,748 
340, 716 


452,581 
1,426,604 
1,302,678 

26, 612 
108, 871 

97, 99o 
116,557 
134,813 
695,671 
105,071 
102,594 

32,662 
123,813 


Virginia 


7,317 

56,933 
103,096 
271,370 
32,985 
47,800 
7,775 
- 50,294 


260 


22,805 
954 
1,614 


Rhode Island 


2,600 
208 
5,326 


Maine 


1,171 
420 
529 
104 

696 


21,724 
1,097 
1,040 
1,640 
1,401 


New Hampshire . . 
Vermont 




43 


North Carolina 






Total 






993,572 


177,579 


36,327 


25,453 


439,353 


4,726,520 



Table XVI. — Manufactures of five industrial districts, 1905. 





Establish- 
ments. 


Capital. 


Wage 
earners. 


Cost of mate- 
rials. 


Value of prod- 
ucts. 


Industrial district of New York 
City 

Boston 

Providence 

Total of five districts 


25,257 
7,780 
4,870 
2,243 
1,237 


$1,572,628,947 
622,081,779 
311,088,956 
166,770,882 
171,177,887 


654,988 
261,456 
160,481 
71,432 
73,391 


$1,209,010,634 
387,566,027 
249,836,524 
124,600,047 
86,568,340 


$2,144,488,093 
677,781,117 
457,254,360 
202,659,272 
156,299,965 


41,387 


2,843,748,451 


1,221,748 


2,057,581,572 


3,638,482,807 



Minerals constitute a second basis of traffic. Table XVII, compiled from the 
reports of the United States Geological Survey, contains an itemized account of the 
minerals produced in the region bordering on the proposed canal in 1908. They 
comprise an aggregate value of $591,424,000. Many of them, such as coal, clay prod- 
ucts, lime, stone and slate, sand and gravel, glass sand, cement, pig iron, and petro- 
leum are especially adapted to water transportation. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



191 



•s[Bjetnui leifto 



•SB£) 



•UOJJ §T<J 



•ranscL?o 



Tf4 



00 1-4 CO 1" I 
I-l T}4 



•ssbjo 



«-i 



PI 
C3 

W 

o 



■\B0Q 



•8uo;s 
-dBos puB oyBjj 



•pABlS pUB pUBS 



•SJ9^BAi lBI9Uipf 



•8XUJ1 



•JBdsp[8j[ 



•s^onpoid v£bio 



1 

02 



N'JlHCOOOOMtC 
NNrtH CO CT5 t— 
HOQt^O OINH 

r-Tc^f lO « H 



OJom 

I— l~ 00 
00 CO CO 



co r- 

IOH00 
CM Oi 



H 00 



CD r- 1 CO Cra 1-4 
CO CO l^- CO i-H 



OONWOCOtDNNr-ICDOOON 
OOOH01iOHHinMHO)00<D 

pi" oTcm* i-Tco" r-T co 



• CO 

• o 

■ OS 



Ttiot>-ooa>cooocot>- 

9(Di- I CM CO CO CM C5 
CO CM CM 00 r-l i-H 



rH • O CO 

CO .t>co -ococooo 

CD >i-HlO -CO^Or-lOO 



8 



CO CM Cj t> 
lO CO CO 



CD l>- t- 

t>«o 

CM 



CO LO TP 
O) CM CM 
CM Tf< 




OS rfi CO t~- rH -34 Oi 

CM 1-4 Tfl Tfl Oi 

C5 CO 00 i-H TJ4 o> -3* 

00 (N TjT rH rH 



-56" 



CO 
OS 



CD 

o 



CM 
i—i 



O 

o 
o 



i 



o 



192 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Another classification of minerals, as made by the Bureau of the Census, is shown 
in Table XVIII. The States adjacent to the proposed canal were, in 1905, credited 
with 59,910 mines and quarries, employing 240,760 wage earners, using materials valued 
at $43,073,000, and producing minerals valued at $289,734,000. 

Table XVIII. — Summary of mines and quarries in adjacent States (1905), United States 

Census. 



State. 


iNumDer oi 


yv age 


M)St OI 


vaiue oi 


mines, etc. 


earners. 


materials. 


product. 




135 


3,684 


$476,964 


$3,656, 134 


New Hampshire 


56 


1,253 


134, 128 


1,176,312 


Vermont 


192 


5,398 


1,076, 143 


5,904,705 


Massachusetts 


251 


4,242 


762, 335 


4,671,855 


Rhode Island 


22 


» 667 


85, 127 


774,611 


Connecticut 


90 


1,497 


236,075 


1,425,959 


New York 


9,768 


9,560 


3,002,554 


13,350,421 


New Jersey 


162 


5,645 


2,235,964 


6,605,402 


Pennsylvania 


48,672 


190,935 


33, 111,903 


236,871,417 


Delaware 


12 


504 


45,361 


448,467 


Maryland 


232 


6,826 


859, 755 


7,313,712 


Virginia 


192 


8,993 


928,387 


6,607,807 


North Carolina 


126 


1,556 


118, 782 


927,376 


Total 


59,910 


240, 760 


43,073,478 


289, 734, 178 



The lumber industry comprises a third traffic source. The returns of the Census 
office, summarized in Table XIX, show that in 1905 there were 6,428 establishments 
engaged in the lumber industry of the States from Maine to North Carolina, inclusive, 
employing 77,789 wage earners, and $88,840,000 of capital. Materials valued at 
$39,738,000 were used annually, and their output was valued at $116,235,000. Much 
lumber, however, is shipped to North Atlantic ports from the States south of North 
Carolina. As shown in the table, there were 3,991 additional establishments in the 
lumber industry of these States, with an annual product valued at $138,508,000. The 
aggregate lumber output of all the States from which the canal may be expected to 
draw traffic was, in 1905, valued at $254,743,000. 

Table XIX. — Lumber and timber products in adjacent States (1905), United States 

Census. 



State. 



Maine 

New Hampshire 

Vermont 

Massachusetts.. 
Rhode Island. . . 

Connecticut 

New York 

New Jersey 

Pennsylvania. . . 

Delaware 

Maryland 

Virginia 

North Carolina. . 

Total 

Georgia 

South Carolina. . 

Florida 

Alabama 

Mississippi 

Louisiana 

Texas 

West Virginia. . 

Total 



Number 
of estab- 
lish- 
ments. 



752 
386 
418 
296 
22 
114 
820 
114 

1,212 
75 
203 
804 

1,212 



6,428 



793 
439 
198 
590 
.618 
421 
299 
633 



3,991 



Capital. 



$15,083,395 
6,079,442 
5,409,750 
3,283,773 
156, 141 
839, 567 
12,599,876 
825,375 
22,677,322 
242, 175 
1,735,837 
9,839,646 
10,068,358 



88,840,657 



10, 717, ( 58 
7, 237, 725 
11,556, 330 
12,625,688 
23,439,225 
37, 385, 028 
18,426,242 
12, 442, 475 



133, 830, 371 



Wage 
earners. 



12,028 
4,594 
4, 216 
1,942 
198 
1,069 
8, 186 
900 
16, 674 
322 
1,979 
12, 190 
14, 491 



77, 789 



15,364 
9,656 
10,408 
14,682 
21,233 
26,353 
13, 332 
10, 460 



121, 488 



Cost of 
materials. 



$7,084, 131 
2,817,671 
2, 183,068 
2,428,441 
100, 177 
499, 802 
5,309,703 
313,611 
10,005,505 
143,979 
1,043,346 
3,339,475 
4,470,020 



39,738,929 



2,996,891 
1,617,713 
2,870,497 
3,909,616 
5,893,360 
8,796,944 
3,642,484 
3,763,461 



33, 490, 966 



Value of 
product. 



$17,937,683 
7,519,431 
5,888,441 
4,903,714 
401, 170 
1,562,254 
13,310,413 
1,116,884 
31,642,390 
430, 44J 
2,750,33ft 
13,040,860 
15,731,379 



116,235,401 



14,435,563 
6,791,451 
10,901,650 
15,939,814 
24,035,539 
35,192,374 
16,278,240 
14,933,472 



138, 508, 103 



The agricultural industries constitute a fourth source of traffic. The following table 
(No. XX), compiled from the reports of the United States Department of Agriculture, 
shows the production in 1909 of corn, wheat, oats, barley, rye, buckwheat, potatoes, 
hay, tobacco, swine, sheep, and cattle. The aggregate farm value of these products 
in the States mentioned is reported at $688,000,000. This, moreover, does not include 
the truck farming and gardening output, which is of vast proportions in these States, 
and, in the case of New Jersey, is regarded as one of the probably important items of 
traffic for the proposed canal. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 193 



03 



NNOoooinooffloioio^to 

.MOCOOOlNHCOOOOlrtH* 

kNO«3 cmoocm <m cm co t-- 

rfS CM CM 

E 

as 



(N OS 

lO H 

CM 
M 



O) 



■^foiot^ioioooc»ioo5'9'Triio 

(.'■VOCN CM CD CO CO CM lO rH 
S O 00 i— I CO CM CM CM 



OS 00 
rt 00 
CM CO 

eo"t> 

i-H 

9& 



.5 

CO 



.CMi-HCOCOCO-tlt^COOOlOl-HtMCO 

S.iOCOiO'*r't~r~''t<i-HCOasiOCOiO 
*j rH OS CO CM t> CO 



CM rH 
lO 



O 

o 
o 



g 

© 

fl5 



• CM O 


o >o o 


OiOO 


O 


■ CO <0 


lO CM i-H 


CO !>• 


o 


. t*. O 


NHri 


OMH 


o 


'■ o~r>T 


t^o" cm" 


t> 




• CO 


t-h CM CM 








I-H 




l-H 



CM CM 
rH O 
CO 

oT-^ 

■* CO 

co m 



03 

w 



COCMCMOSCOO'^OOCOaSi-HOCM 
'Ji'VOOiOOtOONOIMm^ 
^lONOHMffliO tO O CO CO CM 

S M«5 i— I i— I 



00 00 
lO CO 
OS CO 

i-H CM 

CM 
6fc 



o 

Pi 



ooo^ooooooooo 

-JOOSCOCOOCMCNiO'O'OCO'OiO 
-CScNC^iOOOOOiOCOt^CMCOf^CMOO 

~ ^ *. -S - ^ 

rfSI^COCM CMlO-^t CM OS rH 

to CM lO CM 



CO CO 

lO »o 



o o 

00 

l-H 



C3 

CD 

Jsd 

o 
3 

pq 



CO lO CM O OS 00 00 
^OOlOi-HTtlTtn^^o 
r2 CM CO lO i-H CO 



cq 



00 CO OS 
lO J>- CD OS 

rH CO 



CO 

i— I iO 

l-H "S< 



CO 



00 00 O CM T 
c/OOOCNi-HOCOOOO 

>s2 CM lO 1- CM r-H i-H 
6 .... - 

rfS i-H lO CM 

M 



l-H 00 

CO 



N 

cu 

1h 

C3 

pq 



O O 00 
to LO CM 
"* CM 



CM CM 
«C OS 
OS o 



c3 

o 



OOOUJINHONONWHOOHi 
^CO^tDOHOOiOHO^OOCO 
iCglOOSCOi— it-OOCO CMCO-^iOCM 



rci i-H m t>. 

so CM CO 

oq 



CO o 

OS OS 
00 l-H 

© r4" 

00 <* 



c3 

CD 

id 



OS lO O CM lO 00 

: co co cm us cc 

C: CM 00 CO i-H 00 



fiq 



O us 

CO i-H 

CM TP 



OS O 
CO o 
CO Oi 

CO 



o 



cooooooooiocDiocococe 

rS^OO^HCMOSCO-^COt^^OCOCO 



CM O 

l-H Ttl 
CO J>- 



fiq 



US OS 

-H lO 

CM i-H 



g> >H 

CO r 1 



cu 



03 



B C§ co 



J3 Pt C3-MhHj^ p. C3 



o 
E-i 



a 

OS 



22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 13 



194 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 



IV. Barge Traffic of the North Atlantic. 



Though the use of the proposed waterway will not be confined to barges, it will be 
primarily a barge canal. The present amount of this traffic and its various special fea- 
tures and advantages may well be considered in this report. 

Table No. VII, compiled from the United States Census report on water transporta- 
tion, shows that in 1906 there were 8,699 unrigged craft, with a gross tonnage of 2,260,622 
tons, employed on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. The gross tonnage of these barges 
and canal boats exceeded that of steamers engaged in carrying passengers and freight 
by 1,214,811 tons, and of sailing vessels thus employed by 1,154,721 tons. They com- 
prised 46.6 per cent of the total gross tonnage of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. The 
sailing tonnage, moreover, includes 323,618 gross tons of "schooner barges" which 
are equipped with sail but are towed. They are the " seagoing barges " employed 
largely on the North Atlantic in the carriage of coal, building materials, and other 
bulky materials, and many of them are especially suited to a large and improved 
inland waterway. 

A large portion of the unrigged craft are in the harbor service, but many are also 
employed m the movement of freight between ports. The following table (No. XXI) 
shows the number of barges enrolled at some of the leading ports immediately adjacent 
to the proposed canal. These craft comprise mainly the documented barges engaged 
in the coastwise business. They do not include the undocumented craft, which 
comprise over 78 per cent of the unrigged craft of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. 

Table XXI. — Documented canal boats and barges of ports adjacent to the proposed 

canal. 



State. 



Number. 



Gross ton- 
nage. 



Average 

gross 
tonnage. 



Maine 

New Hampshire 

Vermont 

Massachusetts 

Rhode Island 

Connecticut 

New York 

New Jersey 

Pennsylvania 

Delaware 

Maryland 

Virginia 

North Carolina 

Total 

United States ( total) 

United States (barges).. . . . 
United States (canal boats) 



12 
13 
7 
23 
7 
151 
2,394 
205 
167 
14 
111 
34 
17 



3,155 
4,335 
3,590 
745 



5,389 
1,341 
716 
8,161 
1,602 
45, 154 
529,777 
55,389 
64,574 
4,955 
28,670 
13,690 
1,091 



760,509 
928,455 
847,504 
80,951 



449 

103 
102 
355 
229 
299 
221 
270 
386 
354 
258 
402 
64 



241 
214 

236 
108 



There has been within recent years a marked increase in the relative number and 
tonnage of barges. The returns of the United States commissioner of navigation show 
that for the country as a whole there has been a steady decline of the documented 
sailing tonnage from 4,622,609 tons in 1861 to 1,711,076 in 1909. The gross tonnage of 
documented steamships during the same years increased from 710,463 to 4,749,224 tons. 
The introduction of barges is a more recent movement. From 213,156 gross tons in 
1868 the tonnage of documented barges has increased to 847,504 in 1909. 

The United States Census returns further show that the gross tonnage of all unrigged 
craft, documented and undocumented, increased from 4,973,356 tons in 1889 to 
7,129,631 in 1906, and their number from 16,937 to 20,263. The movement, further- 
more, has been primarily on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, where the gross tonnage of 
all unrigged craft grew from 623,483 gross tons in 1889 to 2,260,622 in 1906, or by 262.6 
per cent. Their number increased from 3,425 in 1889 to 8,699 in 1906, or by 154 per 
cent, and their value from $7,837,440 to $41,658,685, or by 431.5 per cent. As pre- 
viously mentioned, the sailing tonnage, moreover, includes 389 schooner barges with 
a gross tonnage of 323,618 tons. The following table, compiled from the census reports 
of 1889 and 1906, shows that this increase in barge traffic has been within recent years, 
in every respect, more rapid on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts than the increase in steam 
traffic. It likewise emphasizes the absolute as well as relative decline of sailing 
vessel tonnage. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 195 



Table XXII. — Relative growth of unrigged craft on Atlantic and Gulf coasts, United 

States Census. 



Item. 


1889 


1906 


oYi q n c/p 1 


Steam vessels 


number. . 


2,536 


5,413 


+113.4 




do.... 


6,277 


5,920 


- 5.7 




do.... 


3,425 


8,699 


+154. 


Gross tonnage: 










Steam 


tons.. 


741,770 


1,457,894 


+ 96.5 




do.... 


1,293,192 


1,132,905 


- 12.4 




do.... 


623, 483 


2,260,622 


+262. 6 


Value of vessels: 














$65,518,640 


$193,926,327 


+196.0 






$42,685,982 


$37,520,903 


- 12.1 






$7,837,440 


$41,658,685 


+431.5 



1 Decrease, — ; increase, +. 



The decline in sailing tonnage and increase in barge and steam tonnage is shown 
also in the following table (No. XXIII), which is based on the "Record of American 
shipping," and includes only domestic seagoing coastwise vessels: 



Table XXIII. 



Vessels. 


1891 


1901 


1911 


No. 


Tonnage. 


No. 


Tonnage. 


No. 


Tonnage. 


Sail... 


1,347 
8 
120 


615,885 
7,976 
180,670 


741 
95 
97 


430, 199 
83,061 
151,937 


594 
160 
145 


404,237 
157, 502 
283, 393 


Barge 


Steam 


Total 


1,502 


804, 476 


933 


675, 197 


899 


845,132 



Barges and schooner barges are a distinct development in coastwise water trans- 
portation. The latter are devised to partly overcome the danger of the open-sea 
route. They are rigged with short masts and a limited amount of sail, so that they 
may not be entirely helpless in case they break away from their towing steamer or 
tug. They are largely responsible for the marked decline in the use of sailing vessels 
for coastwise coal, lumber, phosphate rock, and other bulky cargo. 

The conversion of the steam collier fleet of the Philadelphia & Reading Railway 
into a fleet of schooner barges is a striking instance in which the schooner barge has 
displaced the steamer, As is stated by the Bureau of Corporations, "with the devel- 
opment of other types of vessels, the time consumed in receiving and discharging 
cargo and the expense of the larger crew continuously maintained placed these steam 
colliers at a disadvantage. They were, for the most part, sold or converted into 
schooner barges, while their place has been taken by a fleet of tugs and schooner 
barges." 

Advantages of barges as means of transportation. — Barges and schooner barges have 
various distinct advantages over sailing vessels and steamers. First, their initial 
cost is smaller. The inland barges are built to obtain the greatest possible capacity 
upon a given depth of water; but, being towed and used strictly for freight, they are 
not built with beauty of design. Seagoing barges are larger, but are likewise built 
for economy. Numerous sailing vessels and some steamers have, at small expense, 
been converted into seagoing barges. 

Second, they are towed by tugs or steamers, singly or in fleets of two or three. 
Inland barges are sometimes towed in fleets of as many as six barges. This means 
that the costly machinery of the tug serves to transport several craft, just as the loco- 
motive hauls a train of cars. Likewise the tug can be more continuously employed 
than can either the steamer or sailing vessel. While the barges which it has brought 
to port are being loaded or unloaded, it can return to its point of origin with another 
fleet of empty or loaded barges. 

Third, this constant employment of motive power results in a higher degree of 
efficiency. As is reported by the United States Bureau of Corporations, "The effi- 
ciency of the schooner barge in the coal movement is illustrated by the comparisons 



196 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



of the new Philadelphia & Reading fleet of 11 tugs and 63 barges with the former 

fleet of 15 steam colliers of the same line. The average carrying capacity of the steam 
collier was 1,200 tons, the average of the barges is 1,600 tons, and the class A barges 
have a capacity of 3,300 tons. The old fleet could, in about 500 voyages, deliver 
approximately 600,000 tons a year, while the schooner barges in 300 voyages from 
Philadelphia to eastern ports and leturn, aggregating about 1,150 barge cargoes, can 
deliver 2,400,000 tons of coal in 12 months." 

Fourth, economy results also from the small number of men in a barge crew. Being 
towed, each barge in a fleet of even the large seagoing schooner barges is manned by 
a crew of but three or four men. 

Fifth, as compared with sailing vessels, the seagoing as well as the inland barge 
lines have the advantage of greater regularity of service. Inland barges, however, 
can be relied on within closer limits than seagoing barges, because they are not hin- 
dered to any great extent by the storms and heavy seas which the latter too frequently 
encounter. 

The advantage in dollars and cents of the barge over the schooner is shown in the 
following comparative statement of relative costs and operating expenses of a schooner 
carrying 1,000 tons dead weight or 500,000 feet of lumber via the outside route and a 
barge of similar capacity via the outside route : 

Table XXIV. 



Schooner, 
eutside route. 



Barge, 
outside route. 



Cost of construction 

Crew and provisions, per month 

Insurance per annum 

Depreciation 

Freight— lumber from Virginia (other commodities in comparison) 



$40,000.00 
445.00 
2,800.00 
2,000.00 
3. 00-3. 50 



$15,000.00 
90.00 
637.50 
750.00 
2. 00-2. 25 



Barge transportation is particularly adapted to bulky freight, such as coal, lumber, 
sand, stone, gravel, fertilizers and phosphate rock, lime, cement, ice, grain, farm 
produce, brick, tile, terra cotta, iron ore, pig iron and steel, structural iron, railroad 
ties, paper and wood pulp, hides, and similar products which are available for carriage 
on the north and south Atlantic coasts. On an inland route the barges are suitable 
also for package freight, for such barges are protected from the seas and have the 
advantage of regularity and safety to almost the same extent as regular line steamers. 

The economy of using barges over shipping by rail is partly shown in the com- 
parison of the rates on typical commodities when moving, respectively, by rail or by 
barges. Table XXV contains a large number of such comparisons. Most of them are 
made with exactness, but in some instances the barge and rail rates are not quoted on 
the same basis. In such cases the actual railroad rates were converted into an approx- 
imate equivalent of the barge rates. In doing so a cord of pine or pulp wood was rated 
at 3,500 pounds, a thousand feet of green or wet southern pine at 3,500 pounds, and a 
railroad tie at 150 pounds The actual railroad rates are, however, included in the 
table. 

Great as is the balance in favor of the barge lines, as shown by these relative rates, 
the difference would be somewhat greater in case the proposed waterway were con- 
structed. As compared with the barges now using the inland route, the 2,000-ton 
barge could, because of its far greater capacity, carry its freight at a lower rate. Two 
other factors, considered in other parts of this report, likewise would tend toward 
lower rates than rule at present. The one relates to the tolls which are now charged 
by the inland canal companies and which would be removed on a free Government 
waterway. The other refers to the reduced marine insurance rates on barges and 
barge cargoes when using an inland route. They are now from 50 per cent to 75 per 
cent lower than via the outside route. Coastwise barges are obliged to pay from 8 
per cent to 12 per cent or go uninsured and protect themselves when possible by 
higher rates of freight. 

It is estimated that a 1,000-ton barge, loading 75 per cent capacity cargo (750 tons), 
can be profitably operated through the proposed free ship waterway across the State 
of New Jersey, between Philadelphia and New York, at an average rate of freight of 
45 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds. (See Exhibit " A, " Appendix C.) 

In like manner a 2,000-ton barge, loading 60 per cent capacity cargo (1,200 tons), 
could be operated at an average freight of 35 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds. (See 
Exhibit « 'B, " Appendix C.) 

Terminal charges are not embraced in the above freight rates. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



197 



rH CO 

05 03 

ft 

$ P~ 



05 



p 

05 <K 05 

>g 8 

C^rn co 



05 

a 

o 



!T3 
05 



2* 

ft 

2 So 

-a 2 
•Sfg 

05 Tl 



cfl'-JS 
Ph" 



O 05 



.2-8' 

s »' 

o3 PgUp 1 

_r'a 

^ 05 

U ft 

05 00 
ft 03 
- 03 
co 



05 O 
M rH 



P 8 03 o 

53 ft !h -U 

P? M 05 S 

3 8 s >h 



co 
05 

So 

o3 

pq 



rP 

bp 

<«H 

o 

05 
hp 

o3 

Ph 



.2 

c3 

p 

• r- I 

-3 
1 

| 

bjO 

o 



o 

EH 



O 



a 

o 

O 




■4-3 -t-i 
05 05 
•2,05 
**— t <♦— I 

§o 
o 
o o 



-(-3 -w 

05 05 
,0) 03 
*th 

o o 
o o 
o o 



O CN <N CN 

8 p p p 

~o o o 

i-H -(-2 +J +J 



Sh Sh 

05 05 



05 05 
&.P. 



+» O O O O Q 
05 o o o • 3 
O O O f 05 N CNl 

CD P ^ fa 
o O O O 

05 05 05 05+505 05 05-; 

iOOOO O ■f >-0 O " 
H (N © N nto 2 ^ °5 *2 

CO rH rH IN 4' (N H CO 



CO CO CO CO CO CO CO m 
13 *3 *3 *3 *3 *3 'O 
PPcoPPPPPco'P 
3 3-3 P P 3 P PtJ 3 

OOpOOOOOflO 

oo gooooo go 

O O PlO o o 55 3» ft-* 

oo^ooooo^o 

H-i -U p -U -|P H-5 +i p H- 3 

•O)05-i2Q5Q5O5 05 05+3a5 
ft ft^ ftftftftft^ Ph 

co cn ftc& cn c» co t-- ftoi 

r-5 rH CN i-H CN rH CN CN CN rH 



p 

p 
o 

Ph 

o 

CN 



p 

o 

+3 



Pi rH 



• co , co co co ■ • - co • co co co •cococococo - co 

""O t r O r P r P I 1 I /P | r 3 r P r O ' *3 ^ X5 rp *3 ,r P 

cocopcoppPco IcoPco" pPPcoPPPpPcoP 

rQT-J prp p p prp «Jrp r-J rp p PH £J rrf p p 3 - prp p 

ppoPooop'PpopooopooooPpo 
3 3 ft 3 ft ft ft 3 P 3 ftp ftftft 3 ft ft ft ft ft 3 Ph 

ftfto Rooo ft 2 ft^ ftooo ftSooTf'* ft^i 
, o o o m Ph cn ooo ooo<-n,cn cn 



o o 1 



Uf «H ^ 4H 5 ^ S U ^ fci S fci S ^ f>f S ^ fl p P P 
ft Oh* 3 Ph^ Ph 8 Ph"^ ^■^fl^VP+.^ji+i 

SH (HS-t!H Gj r-l t-ir-(t-fO>H(Ht-lS-l!HOr-l 

COCO05C0o)05 05CO CO a5C0Q5Q5Q5+Ja5a5O505Q54J05o5 . 

a a ft P ftftft p " p ft p ftPHPpa^ ftSo 

05 05O 05OOO 05 P 05"5 05OOO 05QOOOO 05io ^"O 
05 0500 OCOCNcq 05 05 OO) O CN CO CN M<C35 N O) O I- PhC3> _ ' 

NMh'cOh'hhh u O h h N h h N h N rt (N (N IN h 

CNCN^rH€^^^i-HO)rH^i-H^^«r|F^^S^er5&^S©<^4©<H 



-3 

p 

3 

o 

Ph 

o 
"*< 

CN 

p 

o 



T3 

p 

3 
o 

Pt 

o 
o 



05 
Ph 



■ co co 1 t • ■ t 

■ ■OT) 

• 33 

■ 3 3 co co co co co 

3 3 -O 13. rp rp rp 



o o 



p p p p p 



"3 

: p 
. p 

o 



co co co co co co 00 
^ ^ 'P T3 X3 
P P p 3 P P P 
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 
p o o o o o o 



PpngggPHPHPHpHPHg^P^ftpHPHftaPPH 
OOO rvTcTO OOOO O 3 O pOOOOOOO 



"rH "3 3 1 — I rH rH CN rH M gO gOOOCNCNCNCN 

rf^S-S 8 ftft^S feg^5§3fefefec3c3 

ftP« » « & § PhPhPhPhPhPhPh 



053Q5C0C0333 



g^PPglgpl^-P-^PP^P^^ 
^SS_„ Q5 CO8a58Q5 05 05 05 05 Q505 

■in o qOoooo oho wo fto o o o o g o 

iHiOO^^^UJ^oHOHOOiOiOiOOO 

'^^^^oococoifSOsioeF^^oosr^^cnoocoiOTtico 



CO 

-3 

PrrH 

1p 

ftp 



■*j cn o P<oq +j o Pi+i o o 




Q5cNC0cNCOC0COC0COCOCO 



rH 

05 05 

h o-g P 



1 V: 



CO 




CO 

-3 


P 




p 


P 




p 


O 







ft 




ft 


O 




9 


CN 




CN 


cf 




CN 


rH 




f-i 


05 




05 


ft 




ft 


CO 




CO 






p-2 

05^ 


en 


05 




05 


O 







CD 







CQ CO CO CO CO CO 

'"O *^ 73 ^ 
p 3 P p p 3 P 
P333333 mM 

OOOOOO OrgrrH 

Ph P< ft Ph ft ft ft^ 2 

ooooooo 3 3 

OftMOOOCNCNCNCN SS 
8 O 3 »«P <N ON ON CN 

M -o §3PPPP3PS^ 
^O-foOOOOOOCNCN 
P CN ft"* 3 + '* >4J * J+J + ) CN CN 

-tJpO0505CBCDa5Q50)3P 
^ ^, OO ftftftftftftftp O 



rj r— I t-i X >wri lr— i uj vj 

a o^-rH oftfa^t4^^t4t4t4'Pisfa 
8TI°fa^SftPa52-So5Q5a5a5ftft 

» (H^ O M« „OO C500C5 — 

"obS'SoSSooooS o'P'P 



-3 
P 
3 
o 

ft 

o 

CN 



3 
o 
+J 

u 

CD 
ft 

CO 
4^ 

3 

05 

o 

go 



.- 05 O 

HlOCNr-JrHOrHOO'OlO'OOO'OO 

^ ^ ft^- (vi ■^lO500'CO l O^t , COt^C55 



o o 
-3-3 



g 

3 



M 05_fH P 
bn pT^^bH 8 P S3 

05 O h O 05 05 2 r< 



P 

a 
o 

«JOP 

S p p 

O c3 P 
co^! co 

JM-P-P 

« *H 

r^ftpH 



3 03 
co '3 

ft ft 

OH'P ooooooooo 



<2'3 , 3^ r 3'3jj^ r 3'3 r 3 r 3 r 3 , 3 r 3'3 r 3 r 3 r 3 

rH^ rH 

O d O 



o3 

PhPh 



J~> 2 2 2 2 ISSoSOSf^ • o . . ^ -ooooooooo 
|ftftfifirp'«fi^ |.3 ^ ft 3 ^ft grg JjfiAflPfiAQftfl 
B P '3 'S M 3 73 ti ^ g.-Hflc3 

h3 ea Ph Ph Ph Ph Ph O oqCPOO 



P 

rP 

o 



rM 

o 

a 

03 

rP 

CO 

a 

o 

2 

C3 

"cl 
O 
O 

P 

O 



T5 
03 
O 



03 



T3 

9 

CD 
W3 
H 
03 

rQ 



P 

r2 

> 
•rH 
P 
& 

05 

H-2 
05 

ojo 



05 
ft 

a 

o 

o 
o 

^2 



P 
O 

o 
-t-> 

05 

rP 

EH 



05 

3 



(H 

05 

I 



r^ 



6H 

o 

rZi 



198 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



It is estimated that, availing of the most modern, comprehensive, up-to-date loading 
and discharging facilities, 25 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds would cover handling of 
cargo into and out of barges, divided 10 cents per ton for loading and 15 cents per ton 
for discharging. This would make the total transportation charges payable by the 
shipper 60 to 70 cents per ton. 

Barges operated as above, it is estimated, would net their owners, respectively, 
23.2 per cent and 20.8 per cent per annum upon capital invested. 

Barge and railroad transportation may also be compared as regards time taken in 
transit. One of the most frequent complaints of shippers and consignees is that of 
delays in rail deliveries. A large manufacturer of Riverside, N. J., for example, 
writes: "Our trade with the East is very seriously hampered by slow deliveries 
on the part of the railroad companies on account of congestion in and around New 
York and the necessity of transfers between connecting roads to reach New England 
points." A heavy shipper of Camden, N. J., writes: "We find it almost impossible 
to make prompt deliveries on New England shipments from Philadelphia by present 
facilities. Boat connection by an inside route between here and New England will 
be of the greatest possible service for prompt deliveries and lower freight, except in 
such inland towns throughout New England or eastern New York State where it 
would be necessary to make transfer for a long haul." A Philadelphia lumber dealer 
writes: "The time of delivery by water is always more exact and less unreliable than 
railroad time of delivery." A Philadelphia shipper of brass goods says: "Water trans- 
portation can be relied on for deliveries; the railroads can not. The canal would cut 
down the time to Boston by one day, and shipments to New York could be made over 
night." A concrete company of Philadelphia writes: "We find the water route much 
quicker than the railroad to all coast points." 

Similar statements were received to the effect that the canal would reduce present 
delays in coastwise water transportation. A large New York shipper writes that he 
is "now delayed by weather, entailing losses amounting to thousands of dollars," and 
that this "condition would be relieved by the canal." A shipper of Chester, Pa., 
writes that the "canal would save two days on a round trip between Cape Breton and 
Chester, and would avoid bad weather." A Philadelphia manufacturer writes that 
the canal "would cut down the delay of getting through steamers from Boston," as 
he "could use sound steamers to New York and transship." The effect of the canal 
upon delays would influence not only barges, but all steamers that might use the canal 
route. 

DEPENDENCE OF BARGE TRANSPORTATION UPON AN INLAND ROUTE. 

1. Water shipments are now restricted by the scarcity of sailing vessels. A large 
Philadelphia coal company writes that it is "seriously hampered by the scarcity in 
sailing vessels, of which there is a marked falling off." A large pipe and foundry 
company of New Jersey writes: "It is frequently necessary to wait a week or more 
before suitable sailing vessels can be obtained." There are examples of other com- 
plaints made as to the scarcity of sailing vessels. 

2. Barges engaged in the coastwise trade suffer from the lack of an adequate inland 
route. The list of disasters during the 10 years ending in 1910 to vessels engaged in 
the coastwise trade of the Atlantic and Gulf coasts is only a partial index to the dangers 
encountered. Table No. XXVI, compiled from the revised reports of the Life-Saving 
Service, however, shows that during the decade 1900 to 1909, 5,715 disasters were 
officially reported, involving a known vessel loss of $30,380,915 and a known cargo 
loss of $10,168,640, a known tonnage of 483,741 was totally lost, and 3,289,200 tons 
were damaged. The figures of value, moreover, are not complete; those stating loss 
to vessels included but 539 disasters in 1909, and those showing loss to cargoes included 
but 125 disasters. But it is noteworthy that the known loss to cargoes and vessels 
during the decade ($40,549,555) is in excess of the estimated cost of building the pro- 
posed waterway with a depth of 18 feet and a width of 125 feet ($32,250,000). In 
addition to the heavy loss of property, the Life-Saving Service reports from 49 to 
1,147 lives lost annually in the Atlantic and Gulf coastwise service, a total of 2,223 
for the decade — certainly a heavy toll of human lives. 



ISTTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 199 



Table XXVI. — Disasters to vessels on Atlantic and Gulf coasts during the period July 

1, 1899, to June 80, 1909. 



Year. 


1909 


1908 


1907 


1906 


1905 


1904 


Number of vessels 


539 


575 


687 


492 


550 


558 


Loss of vessels (known) 


$3,379,825 


$3,171,680 


$3,162,515 


$2,312,010 


$3,259,985 


$2,898,235 


Loss of cargoes (known) 


$1,377,295 


$841,680 


$692, 175 


$764, 150 


$1,219,360 


$603,505 


Vessels totally lost (known). . . 


103 


177 


215 


137 


165 


173 


Vessels damaged (known and 
















436 


398 


472 


355 


385 


385 


Tonnage totally lost 


48,013 


47,340 


65,685 


29,147 


48, 966 


48,446 




395,375 


454,849 


386,166 


292,658 


271,063 


313, 018 




60 


54 


334 


76 


86 


1,147 



Year. 


1903 


1902 


1901 


1900 


Total, 
1900-1909 


Vessels totally lost (known) 

Vessels damaged (known and unknown)... 


540 

$2,646,490 
$660, 485 
166 
374 
44,989 
289,551 
87 


621 

$3,186,050 
$1,097,375 
185 
436 
63,554 
287,443 
73 


571 

$1,943,435 
$669,890 
175 
396 
35,585 
295,071 
49 


582 

$4, 420, 690 
$2,242,725 
179 
403 
52,018 
304,006 
257 


5,715 
$30,380,915 
$10, 168, 640 
1,675 
4,040 
483,743 
3,289,200 
2,223 



Table No. XXVII classifies the above disasters of 1908 and 1909 according to the 
type of vessels. The number of barges wrecked is far less than of schooners and steam- 
ers, because only a small portion of the barge fleet uses the open-sea route, and these 
start upon a voyage only under favorable conditions. The disasters to steamers and 
schooners indicate to some extent, however, the risks that would be encountered if 
the entire barge fleet were deprived of an inland route. 

Table XXVII. — Classes of vessels lost or damaged on Atlantic and Gulf coasts. 1 



Class of vessel. 


Number of vessels. 


1909 


1908 


1907 


Barges 


44 
5 

6 


74 
3 
4 
2 
3 


51 
21 
4 


Barks 


Barkentines 






1 
1 

25 
172 
6 




Dredges 




Ferryboats 


13 
220 
5 
1 

15 
195 
1 
7 
3 


28 
299 
3 
1 
20 
208 


Schooners 


Scows 






6 
223 


Steamers 


Steam canal boats 


Steam yachts 


11 
1 


8 
2 
6 


Yachts 


Unknown 


Total 






501 


546 


651 





i Figures from regular reports of Life-Saving Service, the totals of which do not agree with the revised 
figures of Table XXVI. 



200 INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 
Table XXVIII. — Causes of disasters to vessels on Atlantic and Gulf coasts (1909). 1 



Cause. 



Calms, currents, and tides 

Darkness 

Fog 

Gales, hurricanes, etc 

Heavy seas 

Snowstorms 

Error in compass 

Error of officers, masters, and crew- 
Error of pilots 

Damage to machinery 

Absence of buoys 

Capsized 



Number of 
vessels. 



9 
3 
32 
58 
10 
6 
1 
16 
3 
7 
5 
2 



Cause. 



Explosion 

Fire 

Ice 

Missed stays 

Sprung a leak 

Struck bridge, pier, rock, etc 

Water logged 

Collisions 

Miscellaneous 

Unknown 

™otal 



Number of 
vessels. 



5 

53 
1 
4 
17 
33 
1 

220 
9 
6 



501 



* Figures from regular reports of Life-Saving Service, the totals of which do not agree with the revised 
figures of Table XXVI. 

The recent loss of 17 lives and 3 coal barges of the Reading Coal & Iron Co.'s fleet 
is still fresh in the public mind. The barges Trevorton, Corbin, and Pine Forest, in 
tow of the tug Lyhens, bound from Philadelphia to New England coal ports, encoun- 
tered two serious coast storms. Barely surviving the first, they were completely 
wrecked by the second in full sight of three life-saving crews, who were unable to ren- 
der assistance to the helpless captains and crews in the raging seas. 

Appendix B contains a detailed list of the leading wrecks, involving total loss of 
vessel, which occurred during the years 1906 to 1910, inclusive, on the Atlantic and 
Gulf coasts. Appendix B is thus not comparable with the Tables XXVI and XXVII. 
The accompanying chart graphically shows the points at which the wrecks occurred 
on the coast from Portland, Me., to Cape Hatteras during these years. 

MARINE INSURANCE. 



The large annual loss of life and property in the coastwise business emphasizes the 
importance of marine insurance. Seagoing barges are such poor risks that marine 
insurance companies will not insure them except at very high rates. Coastwise sailing 
vessels have long complained of the difficulty of getting insurance, and it is regarded 
as one reason for their decline. Outside barges are in much the same position, for 
many are refused all insurance. The rates on barge hulls, on the outside route, range 
from 8 per cent to 12 per cent annually, as compared with an average of 4 per cent on 
the inside route. If staunch seagoing barges were provided with an inside route the 
difference would be even greater, because they would be a better risk than the average 
inland barge at present engaged in the trade between Atlantic ports. As it is at pres- 
ent the insurance rates are so high that many barges go uninsured, and their owners 
either bear the risk of loss or attempt to protect themselves by charging higher rates. 
Some barges carry only fire insurance and go unprotected against other more serious 
marine risks. Some of the barge lines consulted regard the difficulty of obtaining insur- 
ance and the danger of the open-sea route as the prime obstacle confronting them. 
There are instances where barges are sent through the Delaware & Raritan Canal 
partly loaded in preference to sending them via the outside route because of the risk 
involved. The marine insurance companies, on their side, claim that even at high 
rates they are not eager to insure seagoing barges. 

Cargo insurance is usually, though not always, left to the shippers and consignees. 
It is stated that the insurance rates on perishable goods or any cargo that can be dam- 
aged by water are prohibitory, or insurance is refused. Lumber, coal, and similar 
bulky cargoes are accepted, but at high rates. An official of a large marine insurance 
company stated that the average rates per trip on acceptable cargoes are about one-half 
per cent between New York and Philadelphia via the outside route, as compared with 
one-fourth per cent via the Delaware & Raritan. These inside rates would perhaps 
be somewhat lower in case a canal for larger barges were provided. Comparisons with 
the insurance rates on steamship cargoes are difficult because of the difference in kind 
of cargoes carried. The rates on lumber carried from Savannah to Philadelphia, how- 
ever, are usually one-eighth of 1 per cent per trip, as compared with 1£ per cent when 
carried by barges. These rates are given as fairly representative of the difference 
between cargo insurance rates on steamers as compared with seagoing barges. The 
cargo insurance rates on inside barges are at present about 50 per cent less via the 
open sea. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, 3*. C. 201 



The present canals' paralleling the North Atlantic are wholly inadequate to meet the 
demands of barge traffic. The Delaware & Raritan has a depth of 8 and 9 feet, with 
a vessel draft of 7 feet, and the Chesapeake & Delaware a depth of 10 feet, with a vessel 
draft of 9 feet. The former carried 401,231 tons of freight in 1909, and the latter 
818,386 tons. The traffic of the Delaware & Raritan declined from 2,837,532 tons in 
1872, and that of the Chesapeake & Delaware from 1,318,772 in 1872. Southward from 
these canals are the Dismal Swamp and Albemarle & Chesapeake Canals, which afford 
a gateway to Newburn, N. C, but their depth is likewise 9 feet. 

The decline of traffic on the Delaware & Raritan is evidence neither of any lack of 
demand for canal transportation nor of the inability of the proposed waterway to han- 
dle large quantities of freight. The Delaware & Raritan was defeated largely by its 
inadequate dimensions. The carload and trainload of freight and the railroad loco- 
motive have continually increased in proportions, while the inland barge has long been 
limited by the dimensions of this canal and those to the south. Railroad transportation 
has become more economical, while that of the Delaware & Raritan has, if anything, 
become less so, for it has been allowed to deteriorate, high tolls have been levied, and 
it is closed to navigation during a long winter season. Since 1871, when it was leased 
for 999 years, it has been operated by the Pennsylvania Railroad. 

In addition to its small dimensions and scanty maintenance, the Delaware & 
Raritan Canal levies canal tolls. The rates of toll between Bordentown and New 
Brunswick vary from 35 cents per 2,240 pounds on sixth-class freight to $1.50 on first 
class freight. On way freight the charges vary from 1 cent per 2,240 pounds per mile 
on sixth-class freight to 3 cents 5 mills ($0,035) on first-class freight. It is specified, 
however, that ' 'boats carrying full cargoes of fifth and sixth class freight one way will 
be free of boat tolls and lockage, both going and returning, excepting way boats, 
which will be charged $1 each way for passing Wells Falls outlet lock." 

Rates of toll on Delaware & Raritan Canal. 1 



Governed by official classification. 



Between 
Bordentown 

and New 
Brunswick 

per 2,240 

pounds. 



Between 
way points 
per mile per 
2,240 pounds. 



First-class freight. . 
Second-class freight 
Third-class freight . 
Fourth-class freight 
Fifth-class freight. . 
Sixth-class freight. . 




). 035 
.030 
.025 
.015 
.012 
.010 



Except coal and coke. 



Towage charges are also regularly published. From Philadelphia, for example, 
to Bordentown they are 8 cents per ton of 2,240 pounds; to Keyport, 25 cents; Perth 
Amboy, 15 cents; Newark, 25 cents, and Hudson City, 26 cents. These tolls and 
towage charges have deterred many from using the canal. A Philadelphia lumber 
dealer, for instance, writes: "We have often tried the canal, but toll and towing 
charges make it prohibitory." A shipper of Chester, Pa., writes: "We can not use 
the canal for manufactured goods because of high toll charges." 

On through shipments to or from the South, the Delaware & Raritan, moreover, 
depends upon the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal, and here, likewise, tolls are levied. 
On barges carrying ashes, clay, sand, manure, or shells the tolls are 15 cents per ton; 
on common brick, 20 cents per ton; fire brick, 30 cents per ton; coal, 15 cents per 
2,240 pounds; fertilizers, from 15 to 50 cents per ton; pig iron, 20 cents per ton; 
lumber, 30 cents per 1,000 feet; posts (locust, cedar, oak, or chestnut), $1.25 to $1.50 
per 100; railroad ties, 2 cents each; stones, 15 to 30 cents per ton; wood, 30 to 35 
cents per cord, and timber piles, 15 to 35 cents each. These are sufficient to illus- 
trate the general ievel of the tolls of this canal. 

An inland waterway large enough to accommodate a barge of 2,000 tons or more 
is in an entirely different category than the present canals of the North Atlantic, 
the largest craft of which are of 700 and 800 tons. The present operation of these 
barges on the open sea at owner's risk indicates the inadequacy of the present canals 
and the urgent need for an inland route of larger dimensions, better maintenance, 
and freedom from heavy tolls. 



202 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



EXPANSION OF BARGE TRANSPORTATION BY PROPOSED CANAL. 

The above-mentioned facts are sufficient to show that a large majority of the barges 
at present engaged in the traffic of the North Atlantic would use the proposed canal. 
The committee has received abundant assurances that existing barge lines would 
use the inland route with all but their very largest seagoing barges, which could 
not move through an 18-foot canal. A large New England barge line writes: "All 
our outside barges, excepting our two largest, could use this proposed canal, and it 
would be a great advantage to us to be able to use it. It would not only avoid the 
danger of the sea route for our outside barges, but would also enable us to send our 
smaller barges to Philadelphia that now load at New York ports. We transport coal 
almost entirely in our barges, with occasional cargoes of pig iron from southern ports, 
and we transport annually about 350,000 to 400,000 tons. Practically all this amount 
could be shipped through this canal." The prospective tonnage of a single barge 
line, therefore, equals the entire tonnage of the present Delaware & Raritan Canal. 

A prominent New Jersey transportation line writes: "We are in a position to state 
that we could save between 30 and 60 days annually if we were in a position to send 
our vessels through canals. We have been delayed several times at Delaware Break- 
water, Vineyard Haven, Sandy Hook, Cape Henry, and Baltimore, entailing con- 
siderable loss to us. The cost of insurance is prohibitive, and if such a state of affairs 
continues I am unable to tell where our marine business will land." 

Not only would a large share of the barges at present plying between Atlantic coast 
points use the proposed canal, but transportation companies would in many cases 
expand their business by adding more barges. Various barge lines at present operating 
chiefly from Chesapeake Bay points to Philadelphia either do nothing to encourage 
shipments to New York and New England points, or refuse such shipments because of 
the inadequacy of the Delaware and Raritan Canal and the dangers of the outside 
route. They state that their services would be extended materially in case an ade- 
quate inland route were provided. 

New barge lines would be organized if an inland route were provided. Even under 
present conditions there has been a marked shifting in coastwise tonnage from sailing 
vessel to barge, and, to a less extent, from steamer to barge. This movement would 
increase if barge transportation were made safer and cheaper by the construction of an 
inland route. A Philadelphia towing company, for example, writes: "We feel con- 
vinced that our business will be increased 100 per cent after the building of such a 
canal owing to the tonnage that would ply in the same." A large shipper of Chester, 
Pa., interested in steamers, writes: "If such a canal is constructed we shall probably 
build several power barges for use in business which the canal would make possible." 
A large shipper of Philadelphia and owner of barges writes: "We are convinced, from 
our experience in the coal trade covering a period of many years, that the proposed 
canal would be a great benefit, both to consumers and shippers alike, provided the 
proposed Narragansett Bay and Cape Cod Canals are constructed in conjunction there- 
with; in that, in the long run, it would tend to lower rates of freight and insurance, 
effect a saving in time, and provide safer transportation. This is assuming that the 
proposed canal would be open to navigation at all times during the year and free also 
from all tolls." 

A large shipbuilding concern writes: "The construction of the inland waterways 
along the Atlantic seaboard would, we believe, stimulate the building of barges, tug 
boats, freight packets, and steamers for the transportation of freight through these 
waterways until as regular and as well-established lines between points adjacent to 
these waters would be established and maintained as now exist on Long Island Sound 
or on the Delaware River and Bay; and by such means the cost of transportation and 
insurance on raw material and manufactured products would be greatly reduced and 
thereby increase the business of not only this seacoast section, but of the entire country. 
With canals such as that proposed across New Jersey the question of transportation at 
reasonable rates would soon be solved by the establishment of regular freight packet 
lines such as now ply between Wilmington and Philadelphia, New York, and points on 
Long Island Sound, and such as once plied between Wilmington and New York, for 
shipments of less than full cargoes, and by barges in regular tows or by special tugs 
for full cargoes." 

V. Freight Cartage at Philadelphia. 

The above comparison of barge rates with railroad rates fairly describes the relative 
cost of transportation as between railroad freight delivered over private sidings and 
barge freight which requires no cartage at the terminals. This covers a very consid- 
erable portion of both rail and water shipments. The Pennsylvania Railroad has 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 203 



approximately 360 sidings in Philadelphia, the Philadelphia & Reading 350, and the 
Baltimore & Ohio 100. But, on the other hand, there are many industrial wharves 
at which cargoes are shipped and discharged directly, and at other ports, particu- 
larly Baltimore and most of the smaller ports, the industrial wharf is relatively more 
important than in Philadelphia. On such direct shipments the cost of shipping by 
barge, as seen in Table XXV, is materially lower than by rail. 

A second condition exists as between rail and barge shipments when both of them 
require cartage at the terminals. Though there are over 800 railroad sidings in Phila- 
delphia, the United States Census Office in 1905 reported over 7,000 manufacturing 
establishments. Essential parts of every railroad station are regular receiving and 
delivery platforms, warehouses, and team tracks for direct loading and unloading 
between cars and trucks. 

There is sufficient hauling in Philadelphia to support a large public cartage business. 
There are approximately 5,000 teams regularly employed by public teamsters in 
hauling freight to and from railroad stations and to and from the water front. Some 
of them haul any kind of freight offered at agreed charges; some confine themselves 
to special classes of freight and others lease a portion of their equipment to manu- 
facturers. Some manufacturers who haul their finished products nevertheless hire 
public teamsters to handle their raw materials. In addition to the public cartage 
business, there is considerable hauling by the private teams of department stores and 
various manufacturers and merchants. 

The cartage charge between the business districts and the railroads differ in some 
cases from those between the business districts and the waterfront, but their general 
level is not far apart. Cartage charges, therefore, do not vitally affect the compari- 
son of costs as between railroad and barge shipments when both require hauling at 
the terminals. The difference is chiefly between the rail and the barge rates, and, as 
shown above, the latter indicate a large saving. 

The third condition arises as between railroad rates over private sidings and barge 
rates on freight shipped or received that requires cartage. In such a comparison the 
cartage charge is the determining factor. The following table (No. XXIX) makes 
a comparison based on some of the leading commodities shipped both by rail and 
water. In some cases the sum of the barge rate and Philadelphia cartage charge is 
less, and in other cases it is greater than the rail rate over private sidings. In some 
shipments a cartage charge also arises at the terminal from or to which the barge plies 
in its Philadelphia shipments. Wherever such double cartage charges are paid the 
shipper with a private rail siding would gain nothing by using existing barge lines. 
In many cases, also, when but one cartage charge is to be paid the shipper with a 
railroad siding would gain little or nothing by shifting to birges with present barge 
rates. 



Table XXIX. — Relative cost of shipments at Philadelphia by rail and barge, including 

cartage in barge shipments. 



Commodity. 


Cartage 
from water 
front to 
business 
districts. 


Barge rates and cartage charge to busi- 
ness districts. 


Railroad 
rates to 

and from 
private 
sidings. 


Lumber (per 1,000 feet) 

Railroad ties, per 100 pounds 

Brick (common), per 2,000 pounds 

Coal (per 2,240 pounds) 

Sand (per 2,000 pounds) 

Pulp wood (per 2,000 pounds) 

Pig iron (per 2,240 pounds) 

Clay (per 2,000 pounds) 

Fertilizer (per 2,000 pounds) 


$0. 75-81. 50 
.03 
3.45 
.50 
1.00 
.80 

5 . 60-1. 00 
i . 67-1. 12 

8 1.00 

. 60-1. 00 


Norfolk to Philadelphia, $2.75 to $3.50.. 
Norfolk to Philadelphia, $0.10 to $0.13 2. 
Philadelphia to Norfolk, $1.35 to $1.45. 
Philadelphia to Boston, $1.30 to $1.35.. 

Philadelphia to Baltimore, $1.80 

Philadelphia to Baltimore, $1.55 

Norfolk to Philadelphia, $1.63 to $2.03 e. 
Norfolk to Philadelphia, $1.62 to $2.07. . 
Philadelphia to New York, $1.85 to $2.' 
Philadelphia to Norfolk, $1.30 to $1.90. . 


1 $3. 15 
.09 
2. 20 
*2. 65 
1.20 
1.25 
2. 20 
1.95 
1.85 
1.60 



1 1.000 feet southern lumber rated at 3,500 pounds. Actual railroad rate, $1.80 per 2,000 pounds. 
2 Railroad ties rated at 150 pounds each. Actual barge rates, 11 cents to 16 cents per tie. 
8 LOOO bricks rated at 4,500 pounds. Actual cartage charge, $1 per 1,000. 
1 From Shamokin, Schuylkill districts. 

6 Pulp wood at 3,500 pounds per cord. Actual cartage charge, 3 cents to 5 cents per 100 pounds. 

a Barge rate, $1.80 per cord. 

» Cartage charge, 3 cents to 5 cents per 100 pounds. 

■ Cartage charge, 5 cents per 100 pounds. 



204 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



In case the proposed waterway were constructed, barge rates would, as shown 
previously, be somewhat lower than at present, and this would affect the comparison 
of barge plus cartage charges and present rail rates over sidings. Sufficient conces- 
sions, however, would doubtless be made by the rail carriers to retain the bulk of the 
freight handled over sidings. 

The proposed canal, because of these cartage charges, can afford little if any saving 
as compared with freight handled over private sidings. It can, however, afford a 
large saving as compared with railroad freight which requires hauling to and from 
railroad stations, and on freight which can be discharged and loaded directly at 
industrial wharves. 

VI. Water Terminal Facilities. 

Adequate terminal facilities are an essential part of a waterway. Unless proper 
water terminals are provided at the ports so that barges, sailing vessels, and steamers 
plying between them in the coastwise trade can readily find wharves at which to 
load and discharge, there is little to be gained in building an inland waterway for 
their use. Unless practically the entire available shipments and receipts of any 
particular port are to and from large industrial concerns which have their own wharves, 
the port should either regulate private wharves so that they become available for 
general shipping or provide sufficient open public wharves. Since the former prac- 
tice is probably not possible as a general rule, the public wharf is essential. Provision 
should also be made so that barges may as easily as possible run alongside the larger 
vessels in the various harbors to transship cargoes directly. 

The work of providing terminal facilities should be assumed by the various munici- 
palities. A proper division of responsibility would seem to be for the Federal Gov- 
ernment to provide the channel, the State to provide the right of way, and the munici- 
palities to provide the terminals, and each of the three parts is essential to the pro- 
posed waterway. The Federal Government might possibly be justified in making 
the appropriation for the building of the waterway contingent upon a guarantee by 
the interested municipalities that they will provide adequate terminal facilities. 

Such guarantee would not be a serious hardship, for existing terminal facilities are 
at present accommodating a large coastwise traffic. Philadelphia has a total water 
frontage of 33.4 miles with a depth of 18 feet or over. Of these, 18.8 miles are on the 
Delaware and 14.6 on the Schuylkill River. The city of Philadelphia owns 37 dif- 
ferent pieces of waterfront, including street ends, bulkheads, ferry slips, and wharves. 
On the Delaware River 1,402 feet are now controlled by the city and 2,196 feet are 
leased. Most of the leases, however, expire between the years 1912 and 1915. The 
city is therefore in a position at present to increase the number of its public wharves 
and piers on the Delaware, and will be still more so in the immediate future. It 
likewise owns 6,302 feet of water front on the Schuylkill River. It will be highly 
desirable for the city to construct wharves and piers at various places for some dis- 
tance up the Delaware River throughout the manufacturing district which borders 
on the river so that barges and other craft using the proposed canal may find easy 
and direct access. This would eliminate a large amount of long-distance cartage. 

The street ends owned by the city can be made available only for very small barges, 
but under an act of 1907 the city may, if it desires, condemn space at appropriate 
places along the water front. 

The city of Philadelphia is taking steps to accommodate its growing commerce. 
Two piers are at present under construction and plans have been made for the future. 
The terminal plans at Philadelphia are made clear in the following statement of the 
director of wharves, docks, and ferries, with accompanying charts: 

Department op Wharves, Docks, and Ferries, 

Philadelphia, February 8, 1911. 

Mr. Wilfred H. Schoff, Secretary Commitee on Traffic. 

Dear Sir: In reply to your letter of the 6th instant, in which you request, on behalf 
of your committee, information concerning the improvements now under way and 
projected in Philadelphia Harbor, I have the honor to report that due consideration 
has been given all matters in connection with the improvements, and provisions will 
be made for the increased commerce and everything connected with the same, that 
will take place during the construction of the Intra-Coastal Canal connecting New 
York and Delaware bays, and following its completion. 



TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 205 



At the present time there is under construction: 

1. Vine Street Pier. — A double-deck concrete and steel structure supported 

on piles, for the heaviest trans- Atlantic traffic. This pier will be 166 
feet wide and 571 feet long, and will be completed by November 1, 
19.U. 

Substructure about 75 per cent completed. Amount of contract $321, 000 

Superstructure; contract awarded. Amount of contract 339,000 

2. Dock Street Pier. — A double-deck concrete and steel structure supported 

on piles, -for trans-Atlantic traffic. This pier will be 120 feet wide 
and 582 feet long. Plans and specifications have been prepared for 
the pier, and the money for construction is authorized in the loan 



about to be negotiated. 
Amount of contract 500, 000 

Total cost of piers under construction 1, 160, 000 

The works contemplated are as follows: 



3. Catharine Street Pier. — A double-deck concrete and steel structure sup- 
ported on piles, for commercial and recreation purposes. This pier 
will be 140 feet wide and 570 feet long. 

Approximate cost of pier 450, 000 

Cost of land 350,000 



Total cost 800, 000 



4. Allegheny Avenue Pier. — A double-deck concrete and steel structure sup- 
_ ported on piles, for commercial and recreation purposes. This pier 
will be 100 feet wide and 610 feet long. 

Approximate cost of pier 290, 000 

Cost of 130 feet of dock space 100, 000 



Total cost 390, 000 



5. Bridge Street Pier. — A double-deck concrete and steel structure supported 
on piles, for commercial and recreation purposes. This pier will be 
100 feet wide and 640 feet long. 

Approximate cost of pier 304, 000 

Cost of land 100,000 



Total cost 404, 000 



6. Penn Treaty Park Pier. — A double-deck concrete and steel structure sup- 
ported on piles, for commercial and recreation purposes. This pier 
will be 80 feet wide and 467 feet long. 
Approximate cost 211, 600 



As to the plan for future improvement of the harbor, I inclose herewith print sub- 
mitted with my annual report for the year ending December 31, 1909, which shows 
proposed improvements on the Schuylkill River and near the mouth. My recom- 
mendations in that case have been adopted and will be incorporated in the compre- 
hensive plan to be submitted to councils for their approval in the near future. 

Further improvements on the Delaware River will, in all probability, be made 
between the back channel north of League Island and Greenwich Piers, where it is 
proposed to build long piers, such as shown on the plan submitted with my annual 
report for the year 1909, not exactly as indicated on that plan, but the idea submitted 
by me will be adopted to a large extent. 

On the chart showing the Philadelphia Harbor I have indicated in red the sites of 
the piers under construction and the proposed piers. Number 7, near the mouth of the 
Schuylkill, shows the location of the land recently purchased by the city of Philadel- 
phia for harbor improvements on the west bank of the Schuylkill River, in the vicinity 
of Penrose Ferry Bridge: 407 acres, with 2,526 feet of frontage on the Schuylkill River. 
Cost, $205,000. 

Trusting this will give you the desired information, I am, 

Very respectfully, yours, J. F. Hassearl, 

Director (Acting). 



\ 



206 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

A portion of the canal traffic can also be handled at the wharves and piers of the 
industrial concerns located on the water front, for they are themselves shippers and 
receivers of freight. They include various sugar refineries, a fertilizer company, salt 
manufacturer, ice company, several oil refineries, gas works, storage company, linseed- 
oil company, and the Cramp Ship & Engine Works. The railroad water terminals are 
likewise available to some extent. The various coal companies at present use the 
railroad piers. So do some of the regular coastwise and river boat lines, while others 
own their wharves or lease them from the city. 

At the port of New York the city owns most of the North River water front on Man- 
hattan Island from Sixty-seventh Street to the Battery, and on the East River as far 
as Corlears Hook Park. It also owns considerable frontage on the East River, from 
East Sixtieth to East Twenty-ninth Street and a limited amount on the Brooklyn 
side around Wallabout Basin. On the North River, from West Seventieth Street to 
the Battery, and up the East River to East Forty-second Street, there are 180 piers, 
and of these the city owns about 150 and partly owns from 5 to 10 others. Much of 
this city water fron t is leased . There are approximately 200 leases on the Manhattan 
water fronts, 158 of which are for periods extending over 10 years. While the most 
important city wharfage is thus covered by time leases, there are many leases of less 
importance which are at the pleasure of the commissioner of docks and can be made 
available for general use. 

There are also various dock and terminal companies, a portion of whose water front 
is available. Such are the New York Dock Co., the Erie Basin and the Bush Terminal 
Co., whose wharves are south of Brooklyn Bridge; and the American Dock & Trust 
Co., which owns property on Staten Island. 

Numerous piers and wharves are now used by industrial concerns which are pros- 
pective shippers and receivers of freight through the proposed waterway, and whose 
wharfage facilities are assured. On the East River (Manhattan) below One hundred 
and first Street there are 10 wharves for ice, 7 for coal, 4 for lumber, and 5 piers are 
occupied by gas works. On the Brooklyn side north of Dock Street and below New- 
town Creek various industrial concerns have wharfage facilities. The United States 
Bureau of Corporations reports that "the banks of Newtown Creek are occupied almost 
wholly by industrial establishments and concerns engaged in commercial enterprise, 
such as lumber yards, coal depots, etc." 

Baltimore has a total water front of 18 miles, of which the city owns 9 per cent, the 
railroads 17 per cent, and industrial concerns and private parties 74 per cent. The 
upper part of the harbor at present has "extensive wharfage used by coasting and other 
smaller vessels and bay steamers," and those concerns having their own wharves are 
not confronted with a terminal problem. Since 1904, moreover, the city has spent 
over $4,712,000 in building nine city piers and acquiring the necessary property. 
Of these, No. 4 is open and devoted wholly to smaller boats, No. 8 is open and used 
for lumber, and No. 6 is open to all vessels. 

At intermediate points on the canal, such as Wilmington, Chester, Perth Amboy, 
South Amboy, etc., the matter of terminal facilities for general cargoes is of far less 
importance than at the larger terminals. Here the chief shippers and consignees with 
probable canal traffic are, for the most part, the owners of private wharves or have 
leased wharves which they are now using for water transportation. 

While, therefore, the providing of water terminals is of prime importance to the 
proposed waterway, a large tonnage can be handled at wharves and piers used for the 
coastwise and inland business. To assure the success of the project, however, the 
cities should guarantee to provide sufficient wharfage facilities to accommodate all 
traffic that may seek the canal route; 

VII. Development of Local Industries in New Jersey. 

In addition to the through traffic of the proposed canal, a portion of its tonnage will 
depend upon the local industries along its route throughout New Jersey. These 
industries are dependent chiefly upon the abundant deposits of clay, sand, gravel, 
and the agricultural resources of that portion of the State through which the proposed 
route extends. They are already large and will develop further if the waterway is 
constructed. 

The mineral resources adjacent to the canal route do not include any of New Jer- 
sey's stone deposits. A line drawn from Trenton across the narrowest part of the State 
separates the hilly section, which abounds in stone deposits, from the flatter coastal 
plain, in which rocks are either rare or wholly absent. They, however, include the 
most valuable clay deposits of New Jersey, which State is exceeded only by Ohio and 
Pennsylvania in the value of the clay products annually produced. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 207 



As is shown in the accompanying map, 1 there are two extensive beds of clay extend- 
ing practically the entire length of the canal route from Raritan Bay to Philadelphia 
and beyond as far as Delaware City. One of these consists of clay marls suitable for 
brick; the other of Raritan sands and clays suitable for stoneware, fire clays, and brick. 
The total value of New Jersey brick and tile output in 1908 was $6,363,700 and 
$9,019,800 in 1907. The annual output of its pottery industries was valued at 
$5,949,900 in 1908 and at $6,985,600 in 1907. The total value of all its clay products 
in 1908 was $12,313,600 and $16,005,400 in 1907. 

The clay products of Mercer County are valuable because they include the output 
of the pottery industry of Trenton. In 1908 sanitary ware, white ware, chinaware, 
porcelain electrical supplies, and other pottery products of Trenton were valued by 
the United States Geological Survey at $5,649,000, or nearly 95 per cent and 22.5 
per cent, respectively, of the pottery output of New Jersey and the United States. 
Common brick are also produced on a large scale in the region around Trenton and 
Hightstown. Pressed brick are made at Trenton, as also are fire brick, drain tile, 
floor and wall tile. Drain tile is. like wise made at Hightstown. 

Middlesex County, also crossed by the proposed canal route, "is the most important 
clay-producing county in the State of New Jersey, and its importance was so marked, 
even at an early date, that in 1878 it was made the most prominent part of the Report 
on Clay issued by the New Jersey Geological Survey. Indeed, so extensively is the 
clay-working industry of Middlesex County developed that it is highly probable 
that the value of the clay products manufactured there, together with the value of 
the clay mined by persons other than manufacturers, forms about 35 per cent of 
the total value of the New Jersey clay- working industry." (New Jersey Geological 
Survey, "The Clays and Clay Industry of New Jersey," 1904.) 

The clay products of the county include common, pressed, enameled and paving, 
hollow and fire brick, terra cotta, wall tiles, fireproofing, and conduits. It also ships 
much clay to other counties and States. Aside from a few outlying places, such as 
Jamesburg and Ten Mile Run, the Middlesex clay industries are mainly confined to 
the northeastern corner, at places such as Perth Amboy, South Amboy, South River, 
Sayreville, Keasbey, Maurer, Old Bridge, Woodbridge, and Sewaren. This is partly 
because the best and most available deposits are located there, but also because of 
the position of this region. "Many parts of the field are traversed by waterways, 
along which at many points large factories have been erected, and most of the clay 
pits are in close proximity to them as well, thus permitting easy shipment by water 
to many coastal points. The region is also crossed by several important lines of 
railroad." This same commercial advantage, due to position, would be extended to 
the clay deposits located farther west and south in Middlesex County were the pro- 
posed canal constructed. 

The same clay formation found in Mercer and Middlesex Counties extends through 
Burlington County along the Delaware River. Common red brick are made in 
large quantities at Bordentown, Kinkora, Fieldsboro, Edgewater, and Maple Shade. 
Hollow brick are made at Crosswicks and Maple Shade; terra cotta at Burlington and 
Moorestown, and white-ware pottery at Bordentown. The construction of a deep 
channel from Philadelphia to Trenton as a part of the proposed waterway would also 
have an effect upon these clay industries of western Burlington County. 

Throughout the counties adjacent to the proposed canal route there are, in addition 
to the clav beds, large deposits of sand and gravel. In the State as a whole they were 
worked to the extent of 2,124,000 tons in 1907, and 2,083,600 in 1908. 

From 56,000 to 87,000 tons of glass sand were annually used in recent years. These 
deposits, however, are chiefly in southern Jersey, at points such as Maurice River, 
Vineland, and Williamstown, which are not reached by the proposed waterway. 
Though but small amounts are produced in the canal region, as at Old Bridge, the 
following statement of the State geologist of New Jersey as to the relation between 
bulky products, such as glass sand, and transportation facilities is pertinent: "On 
account of the bulky nature of the sand the cost of transportation is one of the leading 
items that determines the value of a pit, and consequently its life. This naturally 
confines the productive area of a glass-sand field to the vicinity of a railroad or navi- 
gable river. Practically every producing pit in southern New Jersey is less than 1 
mile from a railroad or is along a navigable stream, although there is no doubt but 
that good undeveloped deposits of glass sand exist elsewhere in this region." (Annual 
Report, State Geologist of New Jersey, 1906.) 

The proposed waterway further taps some of the best agricultural lands of New 
Jersey, large tracts of which are suitable for truck farming and fruit growing. As long 
ago as 1899 Burlington County had 20,900 acres devoted to vegetable growing, Mercer 
County 5,313, and Middlesex County 5,989. In its annual report of 1908-9 the State 
board of agriculture, through the local board of the county, reported that in Mercer 



1 Not printed. 



208 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



County 1,800 acres are devoted to raising potatoes, producing 162,000 bushels annually, 
valued at $121,500. The value of miscellaneous vegetables and fruits is reported at 
$452,190; milk, $495,116; and poultry, eggs, etc., at $159,300. The total crop, includ- 
ing grains, is placed at $2,283,416. The president of the Mercer County Board of 
Agriculture states that "The southern part of the county is particularly adapted for 
the vegetable and truck business. The northern part of the county is well adapted 
for raising the larger fruits — apples, peaches, pears, cherries, etc. — while the southern 
part is well calculated for the small fruits." 

Mercer County has a considerable market in Trenton, to which surrounding farmers 
cart their produce. It is probable, however, that the larger market which the pro- 
posed canal would make available would result in a rapid growth in their truck farm- 
ing and fruit-growing industries. Middlesex County also raises considerable crops 
of potatoes, vegetables, and fruits, but all available soils are not utilized. In this, 
as well as in the northern part of Monmouth County, the proposed waterway would 
probably stimulate these industries by opening larger markets. Burlington County 
farmers are nearer to Philadelphia, but those within reach of the Delaware would 
likewise be affected by the deepening of the channel from Philadelphia to Trenton. 
A large manufacturer of canned goods in his statement to the committee writes: 
"The proposed canal would enable the farmer to get his products to Philadelphia or 
New York markets, thereby, allowing him to utilize his ground for the raising of fresh 
vegetables, a thing that is now impossible with present transportation facilities." 
The development of the farming industries of New Jersey is of importance not only 
to the farmers, but to the consumers, for the food supply is a growing problem to the 
dense population of the North Atlantic seaboard. 

It is probable that the proposed waterway would have somewhat the same effect 
upon the development of local industries of New Jersey that some of the improved 
waterways of Europe have had upon those in their adjacent territories. The accom- 
panying map graphically shows the industrial development of Germany along the 
canalized River Main from Frankfurt to Mainz. In 15 years existing industries 
were vastly expanded and many new ones, based upon the available resources and 
cheap transportation, were established. The British Royal Commission on Canals 
and Waterways found that the influence of this waterway and of others "had not 
been limited to single cases, but that numerous industrial establishments of all sorts 
had settled along or in the neighborhood of the waterways. The waterway has in 
many cases led to the utilization of mineral resources that would otherwise not have 
been exploited, for instance, the opening up of stone quarries, sand and gravel pits, 
and the erection of numerous brick yards, etc." The royal commission further notes 
the decentralizing influence of the waterways. In the case of the Main, "the new 
industries and the wage earners that they attract, have not settled around the city 
of Frankfurt, but along the river around less populated centers like Griesheim, 
Hoechst, etc." The findings of an official inquiry in Prussia likewise concluded 
that "in conjunction with the railways the navigable waterways exercise a special 
attraction on industries, and more so than the railways alone have done. Therefore, 
the waterways, on account of the qualities peculiar to them, appear to have a strong 
decentralizing influence." 

VIII. Probable Shipments from Philadelphia, Wilmington, Chester, Trenton, 
Baltimore, Norfolk, Newport News, and other Points at Southern Ter- 
minus of the Proposed Canal. 

The foregoing data relative to present shipments by water and rail, the extent of 
production in regions that will be affected and the large amount of cartage, supple- 
mented by the testimony of numerous shippers, consignees, barge lines, and others 
interested in the shipment of freight indicate the nature and the large volume of the 
traffic upon which the canal will draw. Many of the leading commodities likely to 
seek the canal route have been considered. It has also been pointed out that new 
traffic would be created by the proposed waterway. 

It will be well to consider the traffic by leading commodities. An admittedly heavy 
item of traffic to points near the eastern and western termini of the canal would be coal. 
Much of the coal now shipped by water from Philadelphia, Baltimore, Norfolk, and 
Newport News would probably take the canal route to destinations on the New England 
coast. Lumber, railroad ties, shingles, wood and wood pulp, and piling are a second 
heavy group, for even now large quantities are shipped by water from southern ports 
to New York, Boston, and other New England points. The building materials includ- 
ing brick, stone, gravel, sand, plaster, cement, lime and tile, constitute a third impor- 
tant group of commodities suitable to the proposed waterway. Certain quantities of iron 
and steel and structural iron are available. So, too, are cargoes of petroleum and its 



TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 209 



products, pottery, Philadelphia and southern textiles, leather, tobacco, hardware, 
machinery and fertilizers. In addition, the South would probably contribute ship- 
ments of cotton, phosphates, fruits and vegetables, and naval stores. 

The importance of general merchandise in the probable shipments to northern and 
eastern points it is impossible to estimate. This group of articles, however, includes 
the great variety of miscellaneous manufactures produced in cities along the western 
and southern portions of the waterway and its extensions, such as chemicals, electrical 
machinery, glass products, carpets, hats, cardboard, brass goods, silk mill products, 
canned goods, and scrap metals. They now move northward and eastward in very con- 
siderable quantities both by rail and steamship lines. The material saving afforded 
by an inland water route would stimulate the movement of this class of freight to 
northern and eastern markets. 

This conclusion is upheld by the statements of shippers representing many indus- 
tries. A large Philadelphia shipper via steamship lines writes that 50 per cent of his 
shipments would probably move through the proposed canal at a saving of 50 cents per 
ton. A large plaster manufacturer, who annually ships from 40,000 to 50,000 tons via 
the outside route, writes that perhaps 100 per cent would pass through the canal at a 
saving of 25 cents per ton, or from $10,000 to $12,000 per year, and that his shipments 
would perhaps increase by 20 per cent. A paint manufacturer of western New Jersey, 
who now ships about 2,080 tons annually by rail, estimates that 50 per cent would take 
the canal route, and that shipments would increase 100 per cent. A Philadelphia 
manufacturer of paper cardboard writes: 

"Should the canal be put into practical operation we can conservatively say that 
our business with New York City, eastern New York State, covering such points as 
can be reached advantageously by Hudson River, and New England seaports would 
be increased from 300 per cent to 500 per cent. One of tlie principal things which 
prevents our doing business in the above-named territory is lack of shipping facilities 
to secure prompt deliveries at a minimum transportation charge." 

A large New Jersey shipper of canned goods, ketchup, etc., with total present ship- 
ments of over 7,700 tons to the leading points adjacent to the canal, estimates that 75 
per cent of this traffic would take the canal route at a saving of 80 cents per ton, or 
$4,672 annually. 

A large Philadelphia coal company, which annually ships from 300,000 to 400,000 
tons of coal to northern and eastern points via the outside route, writes that 90 per cent 
of this tonnage would probably take the canal route at a saving of from 10 to 15 cents 
per ton, or from $40,000 to $60,000 annually, and that its shipments would probably 
increase 100 per cent as a result of the proposed waterway. A heavy shipper of lime 
from the lower Delaware writes that about 50 per cent of his present shipments would 
go through the canal, and that "steam barges would probably increase it from 20,000 
to 40,000 tons to New York Harbor. An advantage would be to deliver the material 
either up the Hudson or East River via barge without extra handling or lighterage 
charges as at present. ' ' 

A Philadelphia lumber dealer writes: "If the canal between here and New York is 
enlarged and made free much of the lumber from the inland waters of Virginia and 
North Carolina will no longer be forced upon Washington, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, 
but will be sold to much better advantage because the market for it will be enlarged 
so greatly. The development of new business would immediately become possible." 

Similar estimates of probable traffic have also been received from shippers and 
receivers of brick and tile, railroad ties, wood and wood pulp, shingles, piling, brass 
goods, glass bottles and jars, quartz, stoves, ranges, furnaces, and boilers, hardware and 
machinery, pottery, leather, cotton-mill products, agricultural products, iced fish, 
silk-mill products, dyewoods, metals, coke, iron pipe and foundry products, railroad 
cars knocked down and boxed for export via New York, boats for New York and 
beyond, granite, fertilizers, straw and straw goods, mill and feed products, tar and 
oil, and other articles at points ranging from Trenton to North Carolina points. 

IX. Probable Shipments from New York Bay and New England Points. 

Present shipments of bulky products from points on New York Bay and on the 
New England coast to canal points southward are less numerous than those moving in 
the opposite direction. There is, however, a considerable movement of pottery, brick, 
tile, and terra cotta, structural iron, slaughter-house refuse, manure, stone, salt, paper, 
and hides. A very considerable tonnage would be offered the proposed waterway by 
these commodities. Hides, for instance, are needed on a large scale at Wilmington, 
Del. At present many are collected at New York from Argentina and there trans- 
shipped by rail. It is believed that transshipments to Wilmington would be made by 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 14 



210 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



water if an inland waterway were provided to make barges available at the side of the 
ocean-going steamships in New York Harbor. 

The shipments of bulky products would be further swelled by the existing truck- 
farming industry adjacent to the route of the canal and that which is likely to be built 
up by the canal in the future. ^ 

It is further anticipated that certain quantities of Erie and Champlain Canal freight 
would be shipped southward through tne proposed waterway. In 1906 the superin- 
tendent of public works of New York reported that in their present unimproved con- 
dition the canals of New York handled 3,540,000 tons of freight. 1,006,000 tons of this 
was through freight and 953,000 tons moved as far as New York City. The main items 
in the through business are grain, lumber, stone, lime, and clay, tee, iron ore and pig 
iron, and general merchandise. Upon the completion of the improvements now 
under way on the Erie Canal it is probable that greater amounts of grain will move 
eastward from Buffalo and that considerable quantities would reach Philadelphia in 
that way were the proposed New Jersey canal constructed. A prominent Philadel- 
phia iron and steel manufacturer has predicted that the proposed canal would enable 
the iron interests of Delaware Bay to obtain iron ore by way of the Erie Canal direct 
from Lake Superior in competition with imported Cuban ore, to the benefit of the 
entire industry of this district. It is probable that considerable quantities of stone, 
ice, and salt would likewise move to Philadelphia and adjacent points from Erie Canal 
territory. 

A large share of the present shipments from New York and New England points 
southward consist of package freight, including general merchandise and manufac- 
tures of many kinds. Some of this freight would doubtless move by way of the pro- 
posed canal both on barges and steamers. A study of the production of these classified 
products and their markets emphasizes the possibility of heavier shipments to coast- 
wise points than are at present made. This is particularly true of clothing, boots and 
shoes, tobacco manufactures, flour, furniture, sugar, and molasses. 

Certain quantities of freight, such as New Orleans molasses, rice, and other products, 
are at present received at Philadelphia and adjacent points by way of New York. It 
was pointed out to the committee that such freight could more easily and at less ex- 
pense be transshipped to barges at New York if an inland waterway were provided to 
make them available. This difficulty, however, has been largely overcome by the 
establishment of a New Orleans service to Philadelphia. 

Similar to these shipments from New Orleans is the large variety of merchandise 
imported at Philadelphia from foreign countries via New York, which is the center of 
many of the ocean steamship lines tapping foreign markets. A material saving would 
result if many of these "in-transit goods" were transshipped to barges instead of rail- 
road cars from the seagoing steamships which carry them to New York Harbor. 

The statements of a few typical shippers at the northern and eastern termini of the 
waterway may be pertinent. A Jersey City iron company writes that "If this intra- 
coastal canal should be opened and established we could give them about 500 tons per 
year of freight. It would also open up sand and clay banks in the districts where this 
canal would be cut, and where it is too far to haul from now to the railroads. These 
veins of sand and clay are very valuable to this vicinity, and would be valuable to us, 
as we use considerable quantities of these materials." A large New York shipper of 
coal-tar products, now shipping 75,000 tons by water, estimates that 75 per cent would 
pass through the canal at a saving of 25 cents per ton, and that shipments would 
increase from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. A South Amboy shipper of terra-cotta and 
pottery clays estimates that he would ship 20,000 tons through the canal annually at 
a saving of 15 cents per ton, and that as a result his business would increase 50 per cent. 
A leather manufacturer of Newark writes: "The dredging of the Passaic River in- 
creased our tonnage 100 per cent by water. We feel that the canal would do the same." 

The shipment of in-transit goods via New York is shown in part in the statement of 
a large Philadelphia manufacturer of woolen and silk goods and carpets: "It will 
enable us to get direct shipments from South America and Mediterranean ports. We 
use largely of wool from these points and could make through freights to this city. A 
million pounds of wool are now on the way, and we have had to await shipments for 
two weeks on part of this wool because there were no vessels to Philadelphia. We 
can always get them to New York, and if we had a ship canal could save from 5 to 7$ 
cents per 100 pounds." 

X. Effect of Canal upon Railroad Traffic. 

Viewed from another standpoint, the probable traffic of the proposed waterway will 
come from three sources: (1) The diversion of existing water traffic from the present 
outside and inland routes; (2) the diversion of railroad traffic; and (3) the creation of 
new canal traffic. 



I N TEA C OAS TAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 211 



The first of these is singly of sufficient magnitude to warrant the construction of an 
inside route. The diversion of but a reasonable percentage of the present tonnage 
which passes between the ports of the north Atlantic by water would result in a large 
and growing canal traffic. 

The second source is of less importance, though certain quantities chiefly of low-class 
fre 'ght would be diverted to the canal. A portion of the prospective shipments of South- 
ern lumber, wood and wood pulp, railroad ties, fertilizers, stone, sand, brick, lime, terra 
cotta, gravel, agricultural products, heavy iron and steel products, now transported to 
some extent between these adjacent ports by rail, would doubtless be diverted. Many 
of these low-class articles, it should be remembered, are among the least profitable of 
railroad traffic. Their intrinsic value is so low that the rates which some of them are 
able to pay are not sufficient to cover the entire cost of handling them by rail. They 
are at times regarded as profitable traffic if they but yield a surplus over and above 
operating expenses; and their portion of the fixed charges of the railroad is shifted to 
articles of higher class which are able, to bear higher rates. 

In periods of prosperity, moreover, the railroads have shown their inability to handle 
all available traffic without serious delays. Even under present conditions, as was 
mentioned above, it is a common complaint among many shippers and consignees that 
rail shipments are subject to delays which make prompt deliveries impossible. What- 
ever diversion of heavy freight may result would enable the railroads more fully to 
develop their high-class traffic, which yields the highest relative profits. 

The probable package freight tonnage of the proposed canal, above mentioned, 
would also result in the diversion of some high-class freight from rail carriers. Since 
such traffic, however, is essentially suited to rail transportation if conducted so as to 
assure prompt deliveries, the proposed waterway would be chiefly a complement to 
existing transportation facilities rather than an antagonist of rail lines. Various rail- 
ways operate barges and coastwise steamers in connection with their rail lines, and to 
such of their water equipment as could use the proposed waterway it would be a direct 
advantage. 

The third source, namely, the creation of new canal traffic, depends upon the prob- 
able expansion of existing industries and the rise of new industries at points adjacent 
to the canal. The amount of such traffic is problematical, but it is believed that a 
very considerable percentage of the canal's tonnage would be created in this way. 
Cheap transportation of the raw materials of industries almost inevitably leads to a 
growth in business. This would increase the traffic of the railways as well as of the 
waterway, for as the shipments of raw materials increase, so also grows the tonnage of 
finished products suitable for rail transportation. A large shipper of coal, iron, ore, 
pig iron, steel billets, etc., made the following pertinent statement to the committee: 
"The history of the Erie Canal shows that the building and maintaining of an adequate 
canal tends to build up factory communities using coal, lumber, pig iron, etc., and 
turning out highly finished products — thus furnishing to the railroads an equal ton- 
nage of finished stuff at a much higher class rate, so that the railroad profits largely by 
the change." 

The statements of shippers, above mentioned, many of whom predict a material 
increase in their business if the canal were constructed, are especially significant in 
this regard. So, too, are the probable expansion of the truck farming and clay indus- 
tries of New Jersey in the sections bordering on the canal. Other new industries may 
spring up at points adjacent to the canal as the result of the cheaper transportation of 
the necessary raw materials. 

[Appendix 1.] 

OPINIONS OF NAVAL AUTHORITIES UPON THE NAVAL VALUE OF THE PROPOSED CANAL. 
[View of Rear Admiral C. S. Sperry, United States Navy.] 

The inland waterways of the Atlantic coast are an important factor in the National 
defense in several ways. Not only do they afford a secure passage for certain vessels 
of the Navy, but the sounds, particularly, are an outer line of defense, the ditch of the 
fortress. Submarines, destroyers, and torpedo boats, secure in their smooth waters, 
and able to pass out through occasional passages, readily defended by mines, can drive 
off an enemy's fleet, and a hostile landing will be impossible. 

Several times within the last 15 years torpedo boats drawing from 6J to 7 feet, have 
made the inland passage fr#m Key West to New York Bay, but with more or less diffi- 
culty in the region below Norfolk, and with some damage. 

Torpedo boats are not large enough to take the sea and attack an enemy to the best 
advantage at a distance from the coast, and they have been superseded in the building 
program of the Navy Department by destroyers and submarines. In order that the 
largest destroyers and submarines built or contemplated may pass freely and safely 



212 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



through the canals and passages, an ultimate depth of about 14 feet should be consid- 
ered, and the radius at bends must be very considerable. The torpedo boats which 
made the inland passage found their greatest obstacle in the sharp bends, and the 
new destroyers are about 295 feet in length. 

Destroyers and submarines, owing to the fatigue of their crews, and to the character 
of their motive power, can only reach their highest efficiency when operating from a 
secure and comfortable base, and it is evident that the conditions in this respect are 
ideal along the greater part of the Atlantic coast if the waterways are adequately 
improved. As you are aware, the Navy Department has established a complete 
chain of most efficient wireless stations from Maine to Texas, and the destroyers and 
patrol vessels being equipped with wireless, as well as the fleet, communication 
throughout the whole system will be practically instantaneous. 

STRATEGIC VALUE OF INLAND WATERWAYS ALONG THE COAST LINE. 

[Rear Admiral George W. Melville, United States Navy, former Chief of Bureau of Steam Engineering, 

Navy Department.] 

I call particular attention, however, to the fact that this same internal route from 
Long Island Sound to the Capes of Virginia offers us an element of naval strategy 
whose value it would be very hard to overestimate. Just note that along this route 
we have the great navy yard at New York, the one at Philadelphia, the great ship 
yards on the Delaware, the manufacturing facilities of Baltimore, connection with the 
gun foundry at Washington, the great ship yards at Newport News, and the navy 
yard at Norfolk. To make this of real value for naval purposes, the depth must be 
adequate to permit the passage of battleships, which means a present depth of about 
30 feet, and possibly at a later date 35 feet. At present, however, 30 feet would take 
care of our vessels of deepest draft. 

If you will stop to remember one of the chief reasons advanced for the building of 
the Panama Canal by our country, you will see the strategic importance of this inland 
waterway. You all remember the feeling of anxiety throughout the country when 
the Oregon was on her long trip down the west coast of South America, through the 
Straits, and up the east coast, before she joined the rest of our fleet. The time nec- 
essary to make this circuit of South America is so great that for the adequate protec- 
tion of both our coasts a large fleet is necessary. Experts in strategy tell us, however, 
that with the completion of the Panama Canal a much smaller aggregate number of 
ships will suffice for adequate defense, because vessels can be sent from one ocean to 
the other in a very short time, thereby enabling the Atlantic Fleet to be a real support 
to the one in the Pacific, and vice versa. 

In the case of the inland waterway paralleling our east coast, something of the same 
sort is true also along somewhat different lines. Let us imagine that in Chesapeake 
Bay we have a fleet of say 16 powerful battleships, but just outside, waiting for them 
to come out, is a hostile fleet of perhaps 20 or 25 equally powerful battleships. At 
the same time there are perhaps at the League Island Navy Yard five or six battleships 
just fitting out. Possibly several others are just about being completed at the great 
shipyards on the Delaware. For these vessels to come out in small squadrons, in the 
attempt to concentrate, by the external route is to invite disaster, because the enemy's 
fleet is more powerful than either of the separate squadrons, and in these days every 
competent naval commander is familiar with Napolean's famous tactics of dividing 
the enemy, and beating him in detail. With the inland waterway it would be per- 
fectly easy for the vessels from the Delaware to get down into the Chesapeake and 
join the other fleet, making it more powerful than the enemy. I will not attempt to 
elaborate this argument or to develop it more fully, as I am sure the suggestion which 
has just been given will enable you to think of numerous situations where a like ben- 
efit would be derived. Possibly it is not necessary to mention it, but I do not want 
you for a moment to think that the idea of providing this internal route is to make of 
the sand dunes or our Atlantic coast a refuge behind which our fleet is to hide. No 
one believes more firmly than I that the proper battle line for any navy is the coast 
line of the enemy, but it is to enable us to get the maximum advantage of our fleet 
that this scheme is advocated. We are all justly proud of our great naval victory 
at Santiago, but if any of you had an opportunity of meeting Admiral Cervera, the 
Spanish commander, and found what a fine man he was, you could not help a feeling 
of pity for him in his position at Santiago, bottled up, so that there was no exit, except 
into our fleet of superior strength, so that he knew perfectly well that when he came 
out on that Sunday morning in July it meant annihilation. Suppose that, instead of 
the one exit where the entire hostile fleet could be concentrated, there had been com- 
munication with a number of other bays, from either of which he might have got out, 
and you will see very thoroughly the tremendous advantage of this internal waterway 
from the naval standpoint. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 2l3 



I have not laid any stress upon the usefulness of this internal waterway for torpedo 
vessels and the smaller craft, which would not need such a deep channel, for the 
reason that while these are essential auxiliaries of a modern fleet, naval men all over 
the world are now thoroughly agreed that the real fleet consists of the battleships, 
which are able both to give heavy blows and withstand them. The experience of the 
last two wars — ours with Spain, and that of Russia against Japan — showed very con- 
clusively that while there is a role for torpedo vessels, it is a very minor one when the 
battleship fleet is thoroughly disciplined and trained. 

The opinions of Rear Admiral Jas. M. Forsyth, United States Navy, were expressed 
as follows in a letter written to Mr. Joel Cook, November 18, 1907: 

Shamokin, Pa., November 18, 1907. 

My Dear Friend: I am much gratified to see your name mentioned as one of the 
advocates of "coast waterways project." I hope to see you push hard for it, and so 
link your name with the success of an enterprise that means much to the future of 
the commerce of our Nation. It is truly national, and if perfected will be a benefit 
to the whole country. Nature has so prepared the way that there are really no great 
engineering difficulties to overcome, and the matter affects so many States and sections 
that there is the strongest reason that it should have financial aid from the General Gov- 
ernment. Every cent that our Government spends to make communication between 
the sections easy is, in my opinion, wisely expended, tending to make us a homo- 
geneous mass ready to work together. With a canal put across Florida, there is already 
a system of natural inland waterways along the Gulf coasts of Florida, Alabama, Missis- 
sippi, and Louisiana that can easily make New Orleans the terminus instead of Beaufort, 
N. C, and we can meet our brothers of the West as they come down the Mississippi 
with their project. This scneme for an inland waterway along the Atlantic coast 
has been the dream and desire of every seafaring man for 60 years; the Lord grant that 
I may live to see it fairly started for accomplishment. Do not try for too much at first; 
if you can get a 14-foot channel, I trust to the good common sense of the coming Ameri- 
can to make it 20 or 25 in good time. The healthy competition of water-borne 
freight would take a lot of the bitterness out of the present feeling toward the 
monopoly of railroads, and that is what we want. To our Navy it would be a boon, 
enabling us, in time of war, to shift our torpedo boats and submarines from one port to 
another, and so keep the enemy guessing. I had one personal experience during the 
War of the Rebellion that will point the moral. I was a young officer on one of our ships, 
in the South Atlantic Blockading Squadron, when we were sent by the commander 
in chief with important dispatches from Port Royal, S. C, to Nassau Sound and 
Ogeechee Sound, Ga. They were to warn the blockading vessels there of an expected 
raid or attack on them from Savannah. We went out of Port Royal into a southeast 
gale, which became so bad that our small gunboat could not stand it, and we were 
forced to take refuge in Tybee Sound, the entrance to Savannah. Our captain was 
much worried, and finally, studying our charts, found that a light-draft boat could 
get through inside to Nassau and Ogeechee. I volunteered for the service, and in a 
10-oared cutter, went through that inside passage, took the dispatches to their desti- 
nation and returned safely to my ship. You see, there is where in their natural con- 
dition those inland waterways helped us; how much more they will do it when im- 
proved by the enterprise and intelligence of the present generation. 

You are working for a meritorious enterprise, and you, as a business man and one 
who has always been in touch with the commercial interests of your community, can 
not fail to see the benefits that must accrue to the general public if you make it a success. 
I hope you will pardon my addressing you, but my heart is full of this matter, and I 
want to see it go through. All I have written is in the most friendly spirit to yourself, 
and I hope you will see it so. 

Your old friend, Jas. M. Forsyth, 

Rear Admiral, United States Navy. 

COAST LINE INLAND WATERWAYS AND NATIONAL DEFENSE. 

[Opinions of Capt. Richmond P. Hobson. — Extracts from an address of September 1, 1910, before the 
Third Annual Convention of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association.] 

Advantages in time of peace. — In time of peace the advantages of inland waterways 
in national defense means a larger establishment and larger return for given outlay 
of national treasure, 

The development of our coastwise inland waterways would contribute materially 
to lower the cost of construction and of maintenance of our principal coast fortifica- 
tions, navy yards, and naval itationa. The saving would be greatest for the estab- 



214 IN TR AC ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



lishments distant from the sources of supply of materials, which include the great 
plants of the New York and New England groups. 

To illustrate how great the saving would be, it is sufficient to cite the large quan- 
tities of heavy materials constantly required by the Government on which the 
transportation charges would be more than cut in half, such as guns, armor, fuel, 
ammunition, machinery, structural steel, cement, and other heavy materials used in 
the construction, repair, or equipment of forts, naval stations, and ships. 

The cheaper transportation would stimulate our commercial establishments to 
compete in supplying war materials for the world's markets, and the enlargement of 
these establishments would be a great asset in national defense. In addition, the 
inland waterways would enable our frail vessels to escape the rigors of the sea in being 
transferred from one station to another. 

At the present time the bulk of the above advantages for existing establishments 
would be realized through inland waterways extending from Norfolk to Boston. It 
should be pointed out, however, that the opening of the Panama Canal will make the 
Carribean Sea and Gulf of Mexico the center of distribution of the world. The devel- 
opment of the iron and coal fields of Alabama on a river already navigable to tide 
water will not only create new establishments for building ships and manufacturing 
war materials on the Gulf, but will make a new source of supply of structural materials 
for the older establishments on the Atlantic proper. Furthermore, the Mississippi 
River will pour a great commerce into the Gulf on its way to the Pacific and to the 
markets of the world. Therefore the plan for the development of our inland water- 
ways should carry improvements on all the systems at the same time. 

Advantages in time of war. — As great as would be the advantages of our inland water- 
ways in years of peace, their greatest advantages would come in time of war. 

The wonderful development of transportation in recent years has brought every 
important nation within striking distance of all other nations, and at the same time 
has multiplied the magnitude and swiftness of war operations, so that modern wars 
have become substantially a test of the military preparations of the belligerents, and 
not of their resources. All of these developments have worked to the disadvantage of 
America. All other nations have leaped to arms, have organized their whole popula- 
tion into armies, and have taxed their finances upon their fleets, policies that weaken 
their resources, but increase enormously their preparations. 

America alone has failed to organize her people into armies and has given but scant 
thought to her Navy. Though our resources are relatively boundless, our preparations 
are woefully inferior, and a short war, testing only preparations, would leave us in 
humiliation and defeat. Therefore our main objective in an important war must be 
to gain time and bring our resources into play. The enemy's objective on the con- 
trary will be to strike a staggering blow at once before our resources are brought to bear, 
seize our commercial centers, destroy our navy yards and shipyards and bring us to 
terms quickly. If we bring our resources to bear we win; if we fail, we lose the war. 

Whether we succeed in gaining our main objective will depend more upon our inland 
waterways than upon any other factor. 

Conclusions. — The conclusions to draw from even this very incomplete examination 
are simple and clear. 

1. That our coastwise inland waterways next to our fleet itself can be made the most 
vital factor of national defense. 

2. That the services of these waterways increase with the nation's peril. They are 
useful for economy and for building up plants in time of peace; they would always be a 
source of strength after the national defenses were well provided for. They are now 
of paramount importance under our present woefully inferior conditions of defense. 

3. That in any war under present conditions they would afford our only chance of 
gaining the time necessary to organize our forces and bring to bear our great resources. 
They would furnish the only refuge for our inferior fleet, in the face of overwhelming 
odds without permitting its blockade; they would make it possible for our fleet, though 
inferior, to give battle after choosing its own time and conditions, and enable it to 
retire if necessary ; they would make it possible to utilize and expand all our establish- 
ments for repairing and building ships and to assemble and concentrate ships as fast as 
ready. 

4. That upon our coastwise inland waterways in their relation to the fleet will 
largely depend the security of our navy yards, shipyards, and coast cities, and our 
chance of escaping the knockout blow that will surely be leveled across our poor 
defenses the instant war is declared. 

Summing up, if there were no commercial value to our coastwise inland waterways, 
their paramount vital importance in national defense would warrant and demand 
immediate measures on the part of Congress to bring about their full and speedy 
development. 



INTRACOASTAI, WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 215 



[Appendix "2."] 

The following list of wrecks occurring on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts during the 
years 1906 to 1910, inclusive, includes only those involving total loss. It conse- 
quently does not correspond with Table XXVI, which includes all vessels damaged 
as well as lost. The vessels named in this appendix, moreover, include many ships 
wrecked outside of the zone of the proposed canal's influence. It is submitted, not 
to show that an intracoastal canal would have prevented all the losses reported, but to 
give a specific proof of the great dangers to navigation along the Atlantic and Gulf 
coasts. It is compiled from the annual reports of the United States Commissioner of 
Navigation. 

List of vessels lost. 
[Taken from reports of United States Commissioner of Navigation.] 



Name of vessel. 



Rig. 



Lives 
lost. 



Nature. 



Date. 



Place. 



Alice 

C. C. Lane 

Charles A. Witler. 



D. Gifford 

Emma L. Cottingham. 

Gertrude L. Trundy. . . 



Hamilton Fish . . 
Hattie G Dixon. 



Ira D. Sturgis 

Jennie Sweeney... 
Jennie Lockwood. 
Jesse W. Starr 



John R. Bergen.. 
John S. Deering. 
Lizzie Chadwick. 



Martha E. McCabe. 
Mary Manning 



Nettie Gushing . 
Norumbega 



Pendleton Sisters 

Raymond T. Maull .. 
Robert H. Stevenson. 

Samuel L. Russell 

Santiago 



Thomas A. Goddard. 
Van Name & King.. 
W. H. Van Name... 



Wm. F. Campbell. 
Wm. H. Archer... 



Peconic 

A. Heaton , 

A. P. Emerson 

Adam W. Spies 



Annie L. Henderson. 

Arthur C. Wade 

Asa T. Stowell 

Bala 

Bonny Doon 



C. P. Dixon , 

Casper Heft 

Cassie F. Bronson. 
Charles Loring 



Charles F. Tuttle. . . 
Charles L. Mitchell . 



Schooner. 

do.... 

do.... 



.do. 
.do. 



.do. 



....do 

Barkentine. 



Schooner. 
....do.... 
....do.... 
....do.... 



.do. 

.do. 

.do. 

.do. 
.do. 

.do. 
.do. 



.do 

.do 

.do 

.do 

.do 



.do... 
.do... 
.do... 



.do. 
.do. 



Steamer 

Schooner. . . 

do 

do 



do 

....do 

do 

do 

Barkentine. 



Schooner. 

do... 

.... do... 
Bark 



Schooner. 
do... 



Stranded 

do 

Collision with 
schooner 
John Bos- 
sert. 

Stranded 

Foundered 

Abandoned... 

Foundered 

Stranded 



do 

Foundered. . 

Stranded 

Abandoned. 

do 



.do. 



.do.. 



12 
5 



Foundered 

Abandoned. ., 

Stranded 

Collision with 
schooner 
Edith L. Al- 
len. 

Stranded. 

do 

do 

Foundered 

Collision with 
S. S Phila- 
delphia. 

Stranded 

Foundered 

Struck sub- 
merged 
barge Oak. 

Foundered 

do 



20 



do 

Stranded. . . 
Foundered. 
Stranded.. . 



Burned 

Stranded... 
Foundered. 

do 

Stranded.. . 



Foundered. 
Stranded... 
do 



Collided with 
S. S. Seneca. 
Abandoned... 

do. 



May 7, 1906 
Mar. 19,1906 
Aug. 26,1905 



Apr. 
June 



10, 1906 
10, 1906 



Sept. 4,1905 



Mar. 
May 

Feb. 
June 
Feb. 
Feb. 

Mar. 

Mar. 

Mar. 

Mar. 
Mar. 

Apr. 
Apr. 



Dec. 
Mar. 
Jan. 
Jan. 
Dec. 



6, 1906 
13, 1906 

15, 1906 
14, 1906 
13, 1906 
27, 1906 

1, 1906 

5,1906 

6,1906 

20, 1906 
4, 1906 

13, 1906 
23, 1906 



15, 1905 
21, 1906 
13, 1906 
8, 1906 
3, 1906 



Dec. 2, 1905 
Oct. 6, 1905 
Mar. 31,1906 



Apr. 
Sept. 

Aug. 
Jan. 
Dec. 
Dec. 

Sept. 
Mar. 
Sept 
Feb. 
Dec. 

Aug. 
Dec. 
Sept. 
Feb. 

Sept. 
Dec. 



28, 1906 
14, 1904 

28, 1905 
24,1907 
3,1906 
1,1906 

1,1906 
26,1907 
22, 1906 
5, 1907 
6,1906 

30,1906 
24, 1906 
17. 1906 
2,1907 

17,1906 
8,1906 



Chincoteague Cove, Va. 
Boston, Mass. 
Diamond Shoals, N. C. 



Field Rocks, Mass. 
Lat.26°58'N., long. 58* 

10' W. 
Off Thatchers Island, 

Me. 

Off Barnegat, N. J. 
Chappaq uiddick Island 
Mass. 

Near Indian River, Del. 
Cape Fear Bar, N. C. 
Pea Island, N. C. 
Lat.37°33'N , long. 74° 

36' W. 
Lat.36° 12' N., long. 72* 

30' W. 
Lat. 37° 5' N„ long. 71* 

50' W. 
Off Cape Hatteras, 

N. C. 
Barnegat, N. J. 
Lat. 39° N., long. 68° 

W. 

Cornfield Sand Shoal. 
Fenwick Island, Md. 



Chincoteague, Va. 
Gull Shoal, N. C. 
Diamond Shoals, N. C. 
Chesapeake Bay. 
Off Delaware Break- 
water. 

Nags Head, N. C. 
At sea. 

Hampton Roads, Va. 



Off Owlshead, Me. 
En route Bangor, Me., 

to Vineyard Haven. 
Off Fernandina, F^a. 
Outer Brewster Island. 
Off Cape Sable. N. S. 
40 miles west oi Stirrup 

Key. 
Bangor, Me. 
St. Helena Shoals. 
From Pensacola, Fla. 
Off Atlantic City, N. J. 
Stone Horse Shoal, 

Mass. 
From Philadelphia. 
Smiths Point, Va. 
Near Cape Fear, N. C. 
Off Sandy Hook, N. J. 

Charleston, S. C. 
Off Cape Henry, Va. 



216 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 

List of vessels lost — Continued. 



Name of vessel. 



Rig. 



Lives 
lost. 



Nature. 



Date. 



Place. 



Chauncey E. Burk. 

Darby !, 

Ella G. Eells 

Everett Webster. . . 
Fannie Reiche 



Schooner 

do... 

do... 

do... 

....do... 



Florence I. Lockwood . 

Fluorine 

Fred. P. Litchfield... 



do... 

Bark 

Schooner. 



George V. Jordan 

Gertrude A. Bartlett. 
Harry Knowlton 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



Helen J. Seitz 

Helen M. Atwood. 

Henry Sutton 

Horace G. Morse.. 
J. F. Whitcomb.. 
James D. Dewell.. 

James M. Hall 

Jennie Hulbert 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



Brig. 



Jennie G. Pillsbury. 
John C. Gregory 



Schooner. 
....do... 



Landseer 

Luis G. Rabel 

Marshall Perrin 

Matilda D. Borda 

Merom 

Nelson E. Newbury. 
Oliver S. Barrett 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



P. T. Barnum. 



Pactolus 

Providence. 



R. D. Bibber. 



.do. 

.do. 
.do. 

.do. 



Samuel H. Sharp. . 

Tena A. Cotton 

Twilight 

William Marshall. . 



.do 

.do 

.do 

.do 



William D. Becker. 
William H. Bailey. 



.do. 
.do. 



Addie Morrill. 
Adolph Obrig. 



Barkentine. 
Bark 



Alcaea. 



Baltimore. 



Brigantine. 



Bark. 



18 
7 
9 



Cumberland , 

David Carrie , 

E. M. Duffield 

Edmund Phinney. ., 
Edward J. Berwind. 



Schooner. 
....do ... 
....do.... 

Bark 

Schooner. 



Emilie E. Birdsall. 



.do. 



Estelle Phinney. 



.do. 



Fall River. 



.do. 



Stranded 

Foundered 

Stranded 

Abandoned . . . 

Collided with 
s c h o o n er 
Martha E. 
Wallace. 

Stranded 

do 

Foundered 

Stranded 



Sept 
Fe1>. 
July 
Apr. 
Dec. 



6,1906 
5,1907 
4,1906 
12, 1907 
23, 1907 



Abandoned . . . 

Collided with 
St.P.Larch- 
mont. 

Stranded 

do 

Foundered... 

Stranded 

do 

Foundered... 

Stranded 

Aband o n e d, 
towed into 
Port Eads, 
La. 

Stranded 



Dec. 6.1906 
Sept. 27, 1906 
Sept. 26, 1906 

Aug. 6, 1906 

Sept. 27, 1906 

Feb. 11,1907 



Collided with 
S.S.Ontario. 

Foundered 

Stranded 

do 

do 

do 

Foundered 

Capsized; 
sailed from 
Port Royal 
for New 
York. 

Abandoned. .. 

Foundered 

Abandoned . . . 

Stranded 



do... 

do... 

Capsized . 
Stranded. 



Foundered. 
Abandoned. 

Foundered. 
....do 



....do. 



..do 



do 

do 

do 

Stranded 

Abandoned . . . 

Collision with 
S. S. Jeffer- 
son. 

Collided with 
schooner 
Eliza beth 
Palmer. 

Foundered — 



Feb. 

Feb. 

Oct. 

Jan. 

Mar. 

Sept. 

Nov. 

Sept. 



9,1907 
18,1907 
18, 1906 
19, 1907 
24, 1907 
17,1906 
15, 1906 
21,1906 



Nov. 27,1906 
May 4,1905 



Mar. 
Nov. 



13,1907 
18,1906 
Nov. 16.1907 
Julv 16,1906 
13,1906 
17,1906 
9,1906 



Oct. 
Sept 
Sept. 



Sept. 19,1906 



June 
Dec. 



2, 1907 
3.1906 



July 17,1906 



Jan. 
Feb. 
Sept. 
Dec. 

Apr. 
Mar. 

Oct. 
Apr. 



25,1907 
4,1907 

16, 1906 
8,1906 

7, 1907 
8, 1907 

3, 1907 
10,1907 



Dec. 16,1907 



Jan. 22,1908 



Sept. 24,1907 
Dec. 20,1907 
1,1908 
14, 1907 
30,1908 



Jan. 
Dec 
Jan. 



Feb. 4,1908 



Dec. 27,1907 



Jan. 25,1908 



Sandy Point, Abaco. 
Off Atlantic City, N. J. 
Libby Island, Me. 
Off Cape Hatteras. 
Off Winter Quarter 
Light, Va. 



Chincoteague Inlet,Va. 
Cat Island, Miss. 
Gulf of Mexico, Lat. 26° 

N.,Lon. 87° 50' W. 
Pollock Rip Shoals, 

Mass. 

Lat. 29° 15' N., Long. 

71 e 45' V/. 
Off Watch Hill, R. I. 



Beach Haven, N. J. 
Arenas Bank, P. R. 
From Cheverie, N. S. 
Bliss Island, N. B. 
Assateague Beach, Va. 
Off Charleston, S. C. 
Long Beach, N. J. 
Gulf of Mexico, Oct. 10, 
1906. 



Two-Bush Reef, Pe- 
nobscot Bay, Me. 
Off Gayhead, Mass. 

Off Absecon, N. J. 
Bulls Island S. C. 
Wood Island, Me. 
Gull Shoals, N. C. 
Bonaire, D. W. I. 
Off Charleston, S. C. 
At sea. 



30 miles east of Bodie 

Island. 
Off Hog Island, Va. 
Lat. 34° 6' N., long. 74° 

47' W. 
Frying Pan Shoals, 

N. C. 
Cape May, N. J. 
Ocean City, Md. 
50 miles oft Charleston. 
Highland Light, Cape 

Cod. 

Off Barnegat, N. J. 
Off Cape Hatteras, 
N. C. 

Cape Hatteras, N. C. 
Sailed from Xew York 

for San Francisco. 

Not reported. 
Sailed from Philadel- 
phia for Martinique. 

Not reported. 
Sailed from Hampton 

Road* for Savannah. 
Wolf Point, N. B. 
Duck Island, Conn. 
Bridgeport, Conn. 
Sandy Hook, N. J. 
Lat. 35° 24' N., long. 

71' 58' W. 
Winter Quarter Shoal, 

Va. 

Barnegat, N. J. 



40 miles southwest o." 
Block Island. 



DTTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N". C. 217 

List of vessels lost — Continued. 



Name of vessel. 



Gardiner B. Reynolds 

Geo. R. Vreeland 



H. E. Thompson. 

H. G. Johnson 

Havilah 

Helen E. Taft.... 



Helen G. Moseley. 



Henry A. Litchfield. 
Howard B. Peck.... 
Jesse Barlow 



John E. Deevlin... 
Jonathan Sawyer.. 
Josephone Ellicott. 

Leonora 



Mary L. Newhall. 



Matanzas 

Melrose 

Mollie S. Look. 
New York 



Nimbus. 



Number Twenty-six. 

Orient 

Pardon G. Thomson. 

Rebecca Shepherd... 



Rose Innes. .. 
S. S. Hudson. 



Charlton Henry. 



Thomas A. Ward. 

White Band 

Wm. H. Skinner. 



William L. Walker. 



Bluefields 

City of Birmingham. 



Adeline Townsend. 
Alice T. Bordman. 



Arleville H. Peary. 
Auburndale 



Belle O'Neill.. 
Benj. C. Firth. 



Beulah McCabe.. 
Charley Woolsey. 
Dessoug , 



Elvira Ball. 



Eugenia A. Eley. 

Flora Rogers 

Florence Shay. . . 

Gilberton 

Harry Messer 



HattieM. Graham. 



Rig. 



Schooner 
do... 



do... 

Bark 

Barge 

Schooner. 



.do. 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 

.do. 
.do. 
.do. 

.do. 

.do. 

.do. 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



.do. 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 

.do. 



Barkentine. 
Schooner. . . 



.do. 



.do. 



.do 

.do 



.do. 



Steamer. 
....do.. 



Schooner. 
....do.... 



.do. 
.do. 



.do. 



.do. 

.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



.do. 



Sloop 

Schooner. 
....do.... 
....do.... 
....do.... 



.do. 



Lives 
lost 



18 



10 



Nature. 



Foundered. 
do 



Stranded 

do 

do 

Collided with 
Swedish 
S. S. Upp- 
land. 

Abandoned. . . 



Burned 

Stranded 

Collided with 
S. S. Lehigh. 

Stranded 

do 

Foundered 

Stranded 



Foundered... 

Stranded 

do 

....do 

Foundered... 



.do. 



....do... 
Stranded. 
....do... 



.do. 



....do.. 
Burned. 



Collided with 
British S.S. 
Chelston. 

Burned 



Foundered 

Abandoned. . 



Foundered... 



.do. 
.do. 



Collision . 
Stranded. 



....do 

Foundered. 



.do. 
.do. 



do 

Collided 

Foundered. . 



Abandoned . . . 

Capsized 

Stranded 

....do 

Foundered 

Stranded...:.. 



.do. 



Date. 



Dec. 5,1907 
Jan. 27,1908 



Apr. 8, 1908 
Apr. 14,1908 
Nov. 29,1907 
Jan. 29,1908 



Jan. 26,1908 

Aug. 12,1907 

Feb. 15,1908 

Dec. 17,1907 

Jan. 10,1908 

Nov. 6,1907 

Jan. 9, 1908 

Jan. 8,1908 

Jan. 14,1908 

Jan. 27,1908 

Feb. 15,1908 

Feb. 13,1908 

Oct. 23,1907 



Dec. 15,1907 



Nov. 
Apr. 
July 



25,1907 
18, 1908 
26, 1907 



Dec. 4, 1907 



Oct. 
Aug. 



30, 1907 
29, 1907 



June 23,1907 



Dec. 6,1907 

Jan. 24,1908 
Feb. 15,1908 



Oct. 29,1907 

Jan. 4, 1908 

Nov. 4, 1907 

Jan. 12,1909 

Jan. 4, 1907 

Oct. 31,1908 

July 24,1908 



Feb. 4, 1909 

June 28,1909 

Sept. 15,1908 
July 25,1908 
Oct. 21,1908 

Feb. 8, 1909 

Jan. 6, 1909 
Oct. 23,1908 
Nov. 12,1908 
Sept. 16,1908 
Dec. 24,1908 

June 15,1909 



Place. 



Lat. 36° 17' N., long. 

78° 17' W. 
Sailed from Hampton 

Roads for New York. 

No report. 
Anegada Island, W. I. 
Cumberland Bar, Ga. 
Point Garnas, P. R. 
Cape Lookout, N. C. 



20 miles east of Cape 

Henry. 
Cape Henry, Va 
Fire Island, N. Y. 
Pollock Rip, Mass. 

Metomkin, Va. 
Cape Porpoise, Me. 
Sailed from New York 

for Mayport, Fla. 
Diamond Shoals, Cape 

Hatteras, N. C. 
200 miles north of Ber- 
muda. 
Montauk, L. I., N. Y. 
Cape Hatteras, N. C. 
Hillsboro Inlet, N. C. 
15 miles southwest of 

Montauk Point, Long 

Island. 
Lat. 33° 15' N., long. 

74° 50' W. 
Barnegat, N. J. 
Cape Lookout, N. C 
Grand Manan Island, 

N. B. 
Pollock Rip Shoal, 

Mass. 

St. Simons Island, Ga. 
Southeast of Little 

Hope, N. S. 
Fire Island, N. Y. 



Lat. 32° 5' N., long. 

77° 48' W. 
Cape Henlopen, Del. 
45 miles east-northeast 

of Frying Pan Shoals, 

N.C. 

40 miles south of Cape 
Lookout. 

Cape Hatteras, N. C. 

Castle Island, Boston 
Bay, Mass. 

Cape Henlopen, Del. 

Handkerchief Shoal, 
Mass. 

False Cape, Va. 

Sailed from Turks Is- 
land for Philadel- 
phia. Not reported. 

Cape Lookout Shoals, 
N. C. 

Martins Industry 

Shoal, N. C. 
Bahama Islands. 
Cornfield Light, Conn. 
17 miles northeast of 

Winter Qarter 

Shoal, Va. 
130 miles east of Cape 

Charles, Va. 
Chesapeake Bay. 
Boyds Island, N. C. 
Virginia Beach, Va. 
Brown Shoal, Del. 
Handkerchief Shoal, 

Mass. 

Bouline, Cape Breton. 



218 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOBT, N. C. 

List of vessels lost — Continued. 



Name of vessel. 



Rig. 



Lives 
lost. 



Nature. 



Date. 



Place. 



Henry Clauson, jr. 



Henry Wolcott... 
Horace P. Shares. 



Horace W. Macomber. 
Howard Compton 



Independent.., 
Jeanie Lippitt. 



Jennie Thomas . 



Jennie French Potter. 
John McDermott 



John A. Matheson . 



John M. Brown 

Jose Olaverri 

Joseph B. Thomas. 

Julia Baker 

Lulie L. Pollard. . . 



Marie F. Cummins. 



Mary Sanford.. 
Mary B. Judge. 



Miles M. Merry. 
Myra W. Spear. 



L. R. D. Spear 

Rebecca W. Huddell. 

Sarrah W. Lawrence. 

Shawmut , 

William Neely 



Wm. C. Carnegie. 
Wm. C. Tanner.. 



Wm. H. Conner. 



Wm. J. Lormond. 
Abel C. Buckley.. 



Alice E. Clark. 



Anna R. Bishop. 



Arlington . 
Auburn. . 



Asbury Fountain 

Anna R. Bishop 

Ada Ames 

Abbie G. Coie 

Ben Franklin 

Bristol 

Belle Haliaday 

Charles J. Willard 

City of Montreal 

Carrie A. Norton 

Catherine M. Monahan. 

Cox and Green 

Davis Palmer 

Doris 

Edgar C. Ross 



Eleazer W. Clark. 
Eugene Borda 



Edith Olcott 

Edward T. Stotesbury. 
Emily Baxter 

Frances 



Schooner. 



.do. 
.do. 

.do. 

.do. 

.do. 
.do. 

.do. 



.do. 



Brig. 



Schooner. 
....do.... 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



.do. 



.do. 
.do. 

.do. 



.do. 
.do. 



.do. 



do 

Bar ken tine. 
Schooner... 



.do. 



.do. 
.do. 



.do. 
.do 

.do. 

.do. 



.do. 
.do. 



do... 

do... 

do... 

do... 

Sloop 

Barge 

Schooner. 
....do... 
....do... 

do... 

do... 

do... 

do... 

Barge 

Schooner. 



.do. 
.do. 



....do. 
....do. 
....do. 
....do. 



Abandoned . . . 

Foundered 

Abandoned. . . 

Stranded 

Abandoned. . . 

Foundered 

Stranded 



Abandoned. . , 

Stranded 

Foundered 



Abandoned. . 

Foundered... 

Stranded 

do 

do 

Burned 



Stranded. 



Abandoned . 
....do 



Stranded 

Foundered. . 

do 



Stranded. 



8 

*ip 



do 

do 

Foundered 

Stranded 

Foundered 

Collided with 
Schooner 
Hugh Kelly. 

Foundered 

Abandoned. . . 

Stranded 



Foundered. 



14 



Stranded 

Foundered 

Wrecked 

Abandoned. . . 

Sunk 

Wrecked 

Stranded 

Sunk 

Sunk, collision 
Struck wreck . 

Stranded 

Wrecked 

Abandoned . . . 

Foundered 

do 

Sunk 

Abandoned. . . 

Stranded 

Abandoned . . . 



do... 

Wrecked. 

do... 

Stranded. 



Nov. 6, 1908 



Aug. 
Feb. 

Nov. 

Nov. 

Nov. 
Dec. 



20, 1908 
1, 1909 

24, 1908 

6,1908 

14, 1908 
22, 1908 



Nov. 16,1908 



May 
Sept. 



18, 1909 
5, 1908 



Sept. 16,1908 

Oct. 30,1908 

July 23,1908 

Mar. 21,1909 

Feb. 1, 1908 

Oct. 31,1908 

Nov. 14,1908 



Jan. 
Sept. 

Feb. 
Dec. 

Nov. 

Apr. 

Feb. 
Dec. 
Dec. 

May 
Dec. 



31, 1909 
14, 1908 

17, 1909 
28, 1908 

3, 1908 

22, 1909 

10, 1909 
1, 1908 
20, 1908 

1, 1909 
25, 1909 



Apr. 22,1909 



Dec. 
Jan. 

July 

Dec. 

Aug. 
Dec. 

Mar. 

July 

Aug. 

Dec. 

Nov. 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Nov. 

Feb. 

Aug. 

Nov. 

Dec. 

Feb. 

Jan. 

Nov. 
Dec. 

Aug. 
Oct. 
Nov 

Feb. 



22, 1908 
1, 1910 

1,1909 

25, 1909 

17, 1909 
23, 1909 

3, 1910 
19, 1910 
30, 1910 
16, 1910 

9, 1909 

4, 1910 
14, 1910 
18, 1909 
27, 1909 

6, 1910 
24, 1910 
— , 1910 
26, 1909 
28, 1910 
13, 1910 

16, 1909 
2, 1909 

19, 1910 
20, 1910 
25, 1910 

1, 1910 



En route Gulfport, 

Miss., to Michaels, 

Azores. 
Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Lat. 35° 32' N.. long. 

73° 48' W. 
Moselle Shoal, Abaca, 

Bahamas. 
Lat. 35° 38' N., long. 

73° 40' W. 
Hog Island, Va. 
Winter Quarter 

Shoal. 
300 miles east of Sandy 

Hook. 
Vineyard Sound, Mass. 
Sailed from New York 

for Fajardo, P. R. 

No -report. 
Lat. 26° 26' N., long. 

70° 5' W. 
Lat.37°N.,long.71°W. 
Bull Island, S. C. 
Fowey Rocks, Fla. 
Millbridge, Me. 
Lat. 35° 30' N., long. 

74° 10' W. 
12 miles south of Dela- 
ware Breakwater, 

Del. 

Lat.38° N.,long.65° W. 

Lat. 26° 18' N., long. 
71° W. 

Moriches, N. Y. 

20 miles west of High- 
land Light. 

250 miles north of Ber- 
muda. 

East Liberty Island, 
Me. 

Cape Henlopen, Del. 

Yellowhead Island. 

Carteret, N. J., for Sa- 
vannah. No report. 

Moriches. N. Y. 

Rockport, Mass., for 
Key West, Fla. 

Sandy Hook, N. J. 



Currituck Beach, N. C. 

Lat. 35° 43' N*., long. 
59° 42' W. 

Long Island Ledge, Pe- 
nobscot Bay, Me. 

Jacksonville tor Eliza- 
bethpo-t, N. J. 

Long Beach. 

Jacksonville for Phila- 
delphia. 

Winter Quarter Shoals. 

At sea, 50° N., 24° W. 

Off Chatham. 

Boston Bay, Mass. 

Sandwich, Mass. 

Off Sandy Hook, N. J. 

Near Vineyard Haven. 

Vineyard Sound, Mass. 

Plymouth Bay, Mass. 

False Cape, Va. 

Cape Hatteras. 

Lat. 39° N., long. 59° W. 

Boston Harbor. 

Providence. 

Lat. 40° 54' N., long. 52° 
61' W. 

Frying Pan Shoals,N.C. 

Lat.40°20'N.,long.68° 
34' W. 

At sea, 37° N., 65° W. 

Florida Keys. 

Fire Island. 

Cape Hatteras, N. C. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, 1ST. C. 219 

List of vessels lost — Continued. 



Name of vessel. 



Rig. 



Lives 
lost. 



Nature. 



Date. 



Place. 



Florence Leland 

Frank T. Stinson. .. 

Gatherer 

George Taulane, Jr. 



George A. McFadden. 
Geo. F. Phillips 



Georgie L. Drake. 
Good News 



Governor Ames 

Gracie D. Buchanan. 
George Churchman. . 

Geo. E. Prescott 

Henry B. Fiske 

Harry C. Shepherd.. 
Henry L. Peckhan . . 

Harry K. Fooks 

Harry T. Hayward. . 

Hazel Dell 

J. S. Hoskins 



J. Henry Edmunds 



James Boyce 

Jennie N. Huddell. 



John Proctor 

John A. Briggs 

Julia P. Cole 

John Cadwallader. 

Baroness , 

Lucy E. Friend... 
L. O. C. Wishart.. 
Maggie S. Hart 



Marie Palmer , 

Martha S. Bennett. 



Merrill C. Hart. 



Mertie B. Crowley. 



M. L. Wetherill 

Mary J. Russell 

Maud Seward 

Marcus Edwards 

Maywood 

Martha E. Wallace.. 

Molhe Rhodes 

Nantasket 

Nettie Champion 

Nettie B. Dobbin.... 

Norombega 

Nat Ayer 

Perkasie 

Robert C. McQuillen . 



Rosa Mueller. 
S. M. Bird.... 
Shawmont... 
Shenandoah.. 



Sunbury 

Scranton 

Theresa Wolf. 



Thomas G. Smith 

Thomas B. Garland.. 

West Virginia 

Wm. P. Palmer 

William W. Converse. 

Wm. E. Bowen, jr 

Wm. H. Davidson 

Yonng Brothers 



Schooner 

do... 

do... 

do... 



.do. 
.do. 

.do. 



Barkentine. 



Schooner. 

do... 

do... 

....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 



.do. 



.do. 
.do. 



do... 

do... 

....do... 
....do... 

Barge 

Schooner. 
....do... 
....do... 



.do. 
.do. 

.do. 



.de. 



....do... 
....do... 
....do... 
....do... 

Barge 

Schooner. 
....do... 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 

.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



Barge 

....do... 
Schooner. 



.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 
.do. 



11 



Abandoned . 

Burned 

Foundered.. 
do 



Stranded 

Abandoned . 



.do. 
.do. 



Oct. 16,1910 
Nov. 30,1910 
Nov. 29,1909 
Sept. 18, 1909 

Jan. 27,1910 
Feb. 5, 1910 

Deo. 31,1909 

June 3, 1910 



Stranded 

Wrecked 

do 

do 

Stranded , 

Sunk 

Burned , 

Abandoned. .. 

Wrecked 

Sunk 

Abandoned. . , 

Collided with 
S.S. Wm.H. 
Taylor. 

Stranded 



Dec. 

Feb. 

Apr. 

Feb. 

Dec. 

Jan. 

June 

Oct. 

Oct. 

Dec. 

Feb. 



13, 1909 
11, 1910 
— , 1910 
— , 1910 
23, 1910 
10, 1910 
29, 1910 
— , 1910 
— , 1910 
9, 1910 
8, 1910 



.do. 



Feb. 1, 1910 



Oct. 10,1910 
Feb. 4, 1910 



....do 

Foundered 

....do 

Wrecked 

Sunk, collision 
Abandoned . . . 

Wrecked 

Foundered 

Stranded 

loundered 

Collided with 
brig. bark. 
John S. Ben- 
nett. 

Stranded 



Sept. 

Dec. 

Jan. 

Nov. 

Nov. 

Nov. 

Dec. 

Dec. 



13, 1909 
26, 1909 
21, 1910 
22, 1910 
15, 1910 
14, 1910 
5, 1910 
18, 1909 



Wrecked 

Abandoned. 

Wrecked 

Missing 

Sunk 

Wrecked 

do 

Stranded 

Abandoned. 

....do 

Collided .... 

Wrecked 

Foundered.. 
....do 



Dec. 17,1909 
Dec. 16,1909 

Nov. 7,1909 



Jan. 23,1910 

Jan. 13,1910 

Feb. 3, 1910 

Jan. —,1910 



Dec. 
Dec. 
Dec. 
Dec. 
Dec. 
Apr. 
June 
Oct. 
July 
Dec. 



16, 1910 
21, 1910 
15,1910 
25, 1909 
27, 1909 
28, 1910 
16, 1910 
21, 1910 
8,1909 
19, 1909 



Burned 

Stranded 

Foundered.. 
Collided 



Sunk 

....do 

Foundered 

Stranded 

Wrecked 

Foundered 

Wrecked 

....do 

Sunk, collision 

Wrecked 

Burned.* 



July 29,1909 
Jan. 10,1910 
Aug. 17,1909 
Oct. 29,1909 

Aug. 18,1910 
Dec. 18,1910 
Oct. 16,1909 



Apr. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Sept. 

Oct. 

Nov. 

Dec. 

June 



10, 1910 
16,1910 
29; 1909 
30, 1910 
20, 1910 
30, 1910 
12, 1910 
29, 1910 



N 



Lat.40°N.,long.64°W. 

At Porto Rico. 

Assateague, Va. 

Belfast, Ga., for Phila- 
delphia. 

Diamond Shoals, N. C. 

Lat. 33° 25' N., long. 
73° 40' W. 

Lat. 35° 5' 
71° 47' W. 

Lat. 29° 42' 
74° 26' W. 

Wimble Shoals, N. 

Near Jacksonville. 

Parreboro. 

Near Gloucester. 

Nantucket, Mass. 

Near Cape Cod. 

Richmond, Me. 

Gulf of Mexico. 

Bahamas. 

Off Rockport. 

Lat. 31° 32' N. 
69° 30' W. 

Sandy Hook, N. J. 



N., long, 
long. 
C. 



long. 



Mussel Ridge Channel, 
Me. 

Carters Shoal, Chinco- 

teague, Va. 
Cape Henlopen, Del. 
Off Barnegat, N. J. 
Off Hatteras. 
Near Portland, Me. 
Fire Island. 
Winter Quarter. 
Little Egg Harbor. 
Jacksonville for New 

York. 

Frying Pan Shoals,N.C. 
Jacksonville for New 
York. 

Off Block Island, R. I. 



Wasque Shoal, Nan- 
tucket Sound, Mass. 
Near Newburyport. 
Lat. 29° N., long. 73° W. 
Tilsbury, Mass. 

Off Cape Cod. 

Coast North Carolina. 

Off Chatham. 

Scituate, Mass. 

Lat. 38° N., long.70°W. 

Off Nantucket, Mass. 

Off Fire Island. 

Boston Bay. 

Off Barnegat, N. J. 

Mystic, Conn., for 

Charleston. 
Brewer, Me. 
Pollock Rip Slue, Mass. 
Off Shinnecock, N. Y. 
Nantucket Sound, 

Mass. 
Off Cape Henlopen. 
Off Cape Cod. 
15 miles southwest Se- 

guin, Me. 
Core Bank, N. C. 
Nantucket. 

Polloek Rip Slue, Mass. 
Near Vineyard Haven. 
Florida coast. 
Off Bermuda. 
Coast North Carolina. 
Richmond, Me. 



220 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

[Appendix 3.] 

ESTIMATED REDUCTION IN FREIGHT RATES RESULTING PROM PROPOSED CANAL. 

Philadelphia, March 7, 1911. 

Mr. Wilfred H. Schoff, 

Care of Commercial Museum, Philadelphia. 

Dear Mr. Schoff: Referring to your esteemed favor of February 6, 1911, relating 
particularly to a comparison or estimate of the freight charge on transportation of mer- 
chandise between* New York and Philadelphia over three mediums, namely, first, by 
rail; second, by Delaware & Raritan Canal, as at present operated; and third, by 
modern barges of large capacity, such as could be operated through a free public 
waterway of the sort planned in Col. Black's survey. 

From data which we have compiled and from discussions of the general subject with 
numerous experts and practical men, we are satisfied that merchandise of the classes 
and descriptions generally moving or likely to move between Philadelphia and New 
York (this excludes packages of exceptionally heavy weight and extra hazardous 
character of merchandise) should be handled through the free ship canal in barges 
at a freight transportation rate of not exceeding, respectively, 35 and 45 cents per ton of 
2,000 pounds. We believe that with modern, up-to-date facilities for handling the 
merchandise into and out of the barges, same could be performed at a cost of not exceed- 
ing 10 cents for loading and 15 cents for discharging per ton. 

The foregoing would naturally involve commodious economic terminals and availing 
of the cheapest, best methods of loading and unloading the merchandise. 

You will be kind enough to note from inclosed statements (A and B) that we have 
only provided for the barges being loaded, respectively, 60 and 75 per cent of full capac- 
ity. If they were run full of cargo — say, the 1,000-ton barge with 1,000 tons and the 
2,000-ton barge with 2,000 tons of cargo — you can readily see that it would increase their 
annual earning capacity very materially, with no considerable increase in their fixed 
charges. 

More and more it becomes a question of terminal facilities constructed on the 
broadest, largest, and most comprehensive basis which, among other conditions, 
would involve always having suitable working berths ready for barges when and as 
they might arrive, with a system which would involve their commencing to discharge 
or load wrihin a half hour of the time of their arrival in port. This question of 
dispatch we are lamentably deficient in our appreciation of all along the Atlantic 
seaboard. Very much so at Philadelphia. Only last week we had occasion to send 
one of our young men aboard a steamer that was proceeding to Newport News, where 
the vessel went to receive over 1,000 tons of bunker coals. We are informed that the 
steamer arrived at Newport News at 8 p. m. on Sunday, and at 9 p. m. the same evening 
her bunker coals were being put aboard direct from the coal trestles, and she com- 
pleted loading her 1,000 tons of coal late Monday afternoon, sailing, we believe, at 
daylight on Tuesday, if not on Monday. Another illustration is recorded in a letter 
from our New York manager of the ordinary dispatch prevailing at Norfolk and New- 
port News in the loading of cargo coal, in his letter of recent date, which reads as 
follows: 

' ' Steamer G. (4,000 tons cargo). — Although this boat only went on time charter at 
Norfolk at 10 a. m. Saturday, February 25, the captain writes us that it was loaded 
1 a. m. Sunday, the 26th, and sailed at 7 a. m. same day (Sunday^) for Trinidad. 

"Steamer W. (6,500 tons cargo). — This vessel received quick dispatch, arriving at 
Newport News on Thursday, February 23, and sailed on Saturday, February 25, fully 
loaded." 

One of the phenomenal economies that we believe will subsequently be introduced 
through one or more mediums by railroad companies will be dispatch in unloading 
and reloading their cars and the consequent immense increase in the earning capacity 
of their car equipment. 

You doubtless appreciate that the modern barges that may be constructed hereafter 
will be able to avail of all mechanical devices for facilitating the handling of cargo, 
as they would be built with their hatches at least something like those performing 
services on the Great Lakes and into which discharging and other machinery could be 
introduced with the greatest freedom and resultant efficiency. 

Yours, very respectfully, Frank L. Neall. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 221 



EXHIBITS. 

1. Comparative summary of rates between Philadelphia and New York via all rail 
and Delaware & Raritan Canal and proposed free ship canal. Also class rates between 
New York and Philadelphia, with their added respective equivalents in tons of 2,000 
poundB. All rail, Clyde Line (outside), Delaware & Raritan Canal, and proposed 
ship canal. 

2. Class rates between Philadelphia, New York, Baltimore, etc., and illustrations 
of standard articles covered under the different railway classifications. General data 
on coke and coal and certain specified merchandise. 

3. Freight rates and Delaware & Raritan Canal tolls between Philadelphia and New 
York on sundry commodities as mentioned. 

4. Freight rates, Ericsson Line, Chesapeake & Delaware Canal, also tolls between 
Philadelphia and Baltimore on sundry commodities as mentioned. 



Comparative summary of rates between Philadelphia and New York via rail and Delaware 
& Raritan Canal, and proposed free ship canal. 









Proposed free ship 








canal. 






Delaware 








All rail. 


and Rari- 










tan Canal. 1 


1,000-ton 


2,000-ton 








barges. 


barges. 








Cents. 


Cents. 


Machinery 


$4. 40 


$1.80 


45 


35 


Lumber 


2.40 


1. 60 


45 


35 


Hay 


2. 10 


1.80 


45 


35 


Roofing paper 


2. 10 


1.80 


45 


35 


Hides (green) 


2. 10 


1.80 


45 


35 


Oil cake 


1.90 


1.60 


45 


35 


Fertilizer 


1.90 


1. 60 


45 


35 


Cotton 


2.40 




45 


35 


Sugar (less than carload) 


2. 10 


1.80 


45 


35 


Manure 


1.00 


1.60 


45 


35 


Sand 


1.60 




45 


35 


Sugar (carload) 


1.70 




45 


35 







1 Includes tolls. 



Note. — Above rates computed on basis of ton of 2,000 pounds. 

Note. — Estimated respective rates of 45 and 35 cents per ton of 2,000 pounds is determined upon as being 
reasonable upon any and all ordinary traffic between New York and Philadelphia, via a free ship canal 
across New Jersey. 

Exhibit A. 

1. Barges of 1,000 tons capacity could be used. 

2. These barges should be enabled to make 13 round trips in a single year, between 
Philadelphia and New York. 

3. Averaging 75 per cent of capacity cargo, a single barge would carry 19,500 tons 
in one year. 

4. Nineteen thousand five hundred tons, at 45 cents per 2,000 pounds, would give 
a gross revenue of $8,775. This upon a single barge costing $15,000. 

5. Insurance at 3 per cent upon such a barge would be $450 per year. 

6. Wages of a crew of 3 men and the feeding of crew would cost not exceeding $1,500 
per year. 

7. The repairs to the barge would be $500 a year. 

8. The cost of towage would amount to $2,340 per year. 

9. Estimated depreciation for each year, upon a basis of 20 years, would be $500 
per year. 

10. Interest upon $15,000 at 6 per cent per annum would be $900. 

11. The total cost of the investment per year, wages, insurance, maintenance, 
depreciation, towage, etc., amounts to $6,190, leaving a profit of $2,585, or 17.2 per cent 
upon the investment. 

12. Seventeen and two-tenths per cent plus 6 per cent upon the investment equals 
23.2 per cent — a fair rate of return ; that creates a rate (based upon the lowest class rates, 
$1.90 per ton of 2,000 pounds — sixth class) for transportation of only 24 per cent of the 
present all-rail rate and 28 per cent of the canal rate (based upon the lowest class rate, 
$1.60 per ton of 2,000 pounds — sixth class) via the Delaware & Raritan Canal. The 
quoted rate on Delaware & Raritan Canal includes tolls — the proposed canal would 
be a free public waterway. 



222 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



Exhibit B. 

1. Barges of 2,000 tons capacity could be used. 

2. These barges should be enabled to make 13 round trips in a single year between 
Philadelphia and New York. 

3. Averaging 60 per cent of capacity cargo, a single barge would carry 31,200 tons 
in one year. 

4. Thirty-one thousand two hundred tons, at 35 cents per 2,000 pounds, would give 
a gross revenue of $10,920. This upon a single barge costing $23,000. 

5. Insurance at 3 per cent upon such a barge would be $690 per year. 

6. Wages of a crew of 3 men and the feeding of crew would cost not exceeding $1,600 
per year. 

7. The repairs of the barge would be $760 a year. 

8. The cost of towage would amount to $2,340 per year. 

9. Estimated depreciation for each year, upon a basis of 20 years, would be $750 

per year. 

10. Interest upon $23,000, at 6 per cent per annum, would be $1,380. 

11. The total cost of the investment per year, wages, insurance, maintenance, 
depreciation, towage, etc., amounts to $7,520, leaving a profit of $3,400, or 14.8 per 
cent upon the investment.. 

12. 14.8 per cent plus 6 per cent upon the investment equals 20.8 per cent — a fair 
rate of return that creates a rate (based upon the lowest class rate, $1.90 per ton of 
2,000 pounds — sixth class) for transportation of only 18 per cent of the present all-rail 
rate and 22 per cent of the canal rate (based upon the lowest class rate, $1~G0 per ton 
of 2,000 pounds — sixth class) via the Delaware & Raritan Canal. The quoted rate on 
Delaware & Raritan Canal includes tolls. The proposed canal would be a free public 
waterway. 

For the purposes of comparison the all-rail class rates between New York and Phil- 
adelphia are added with their equivalents in tons of 2,000 pounds: 



Class. 





1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


6 






22 


18 


15 


12 


10§ 






do.... 


440 


360 


300 


240 


210 


190 


Rates via Clyde Line Steamers (outside): 
















Class rates per 100 pounds 


cents.. 


18i 


14* 




10 


9 


8 


Class rates per 2,000 pounds 


do.... 


370 


290 


250 


200 


180 


160 


Rates via Clyde Line, via Delaware & Raritan Canal at present 














not in effect, as no boats of this line are operated through the canal: 














Class rates per 100 pounds 




18 


14 


12 


10 


9 


8 


Class rates per 2,000 pounds 


do.... 


360 


280 


240 


200 


180 


160 


Rates via proposed ship oanal (1,000-ton barge basis): 
















Class rates per 100 pounds 


cents.. 


2\ 


2\ 


2\ 


2\ 


2\ 


2i 


Class rates per 2,000 pounds 


do.... 


45 


45 


45 


45 


45 


45 


Rates via proposed ship canal (2,000-ton barge basis): 
















Class rates per 100 pounds 


.cents.. 


If 


If 


If 


If 


If 


If 


Class rates per 2,000 pounds 


do.... 


35 


35 


35 


35 


35 


35 



[Appendix 4.] 

Representative class and commodity rates between New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. 

[Rates apply via Pennsylvania Railroad.] 









Rate. 








1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


6 




22 


18 


15 


12 


10£ 


9£ 




34 


29 


23 


18 


15 


12 


Class rates between Philadelphia and Baltimore 


23 


20 


18 


12 


10 


9 



Articles are classified as follows (illustrations) : 

First class. — Boots and shoes, loose leather, clothing, machinery, drugs (less than 
carloads), knit goods, liquor (less than carloads), dry goods, dressed meats, silks, tea, 
agricultural implements, candy (less than carloads). 

Second class. — Butter (in wood), leather (in bundles), dressed hogs, cotton waste 
(uncompressed) . 



nrmACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. 0. 223 



Third class. — Drugs (carloads), candy (carloads), rope (less than carloads), liquor 
(carloads), condensed milk (in cans, boxed — less than carloads), babbitt metal (less 
than carloads), petroleum and (iron drums) petroleum products (of barrels less than 
carloads), oysters (in bulk — carloads), oysters (in bags — less than carloads). 

Fourth Class. — Cotton (compressed bales), wood shingles (less than carloads), fertilizers 
(less than carloads), nails, spikes (less than carloads), terra-cotta drain pipe, sewer pipe 
(less than carloads), sand (less than carloads), curbing, flagging, paving stone (less than 
carloads), cotton waste (compressed), lime (bags, barrels, casks or drums — less than 
carloads). 

Fifth class. — Petroleum and products (carloads), rope (carloads), shovels (carloads), 
marble (polished) (carloads), granite (polished) (carloads), oilcake (less than carloads), 
agricultural implements (carloads), feed (less than carloads), oats (less than carloads), 
barley (less than carloads). 

Sixth class. — Sand (carloads), wood shingles (carloads), oilcake (carloads), fertilizers 
(carloads), lime (bags) (carloads'), curbing, flagging, paving stone (carloads), oats (car- 
loads), marble, granite (rough) (carloads), sewer pipe (carloads), feed (carloads), bar- 
ley (carloads). 

Rates on coke, in carloads, from Connellsville and Klondike regions, to — 

Baltimore per 2,000 lbs. . 1 $2. 15 

Philadelphia do 1 2. 15 

New York do 2.85 

Boston do.... 2 3. 50 



Rates on bituminous coal to Baltimore and Philadelphia, New York and Boston. 



From— 


Balti- 
more. 


Phila- 
delphia. 


New 
York. 


Boston. 1 


District 1 


$1.60 
1.85 
2.00 
1.85 
1.85 


$1.60 
1.85 
2.00 
1.85 
1.85 


$1.95 
2.20 


$2.60 
2.85 
3.00 
2.85 
2.85 


District 2 


District 3 


District 4 


2.20 
2.20 


District 5 





i Includes switching charges of Bangor & Aroostook R. R. when not in excess of 30 cents. 



District 1. Cumberland-Piedmont. 
District 2. Connellsville of P. & Y. 
District 3. Finleyville of P. & Y. 

District 4. Other points in Pittsburgh and Youghiogheny. 
District 5. West Virginia. 
Bituminous coal, 2,240 pounds to ton. 
Rates apply via Baltimore & Ohio R. R. 
Rates on pig iron: 

Chester to New York per 2,240 pounds. . $1. 40 

Chester to Baltimore do 1. 05 

Chester to Philadelphia do 45 

Rates on manure, Jersey City to Philadelphia: 

Gray's ferry per 2,000 pounds. . 1. 00 

Fifty-second Street do 85 

Rates on sand, Thirtieth and Market Streets, Philadelphia: 

To Jersey City do 1. 05 

Elsewhere in Philadelphia to Jersey City do 1. 90 

Rates on sugar: 

Jersey City and Brooklyn to Philadelphia per 100 pounds. . . 05 

New York to Philadelphia do 08£ 

Item. — For the purpose of comparison and general information, all rail-class rates 
as follows are submitted : 





1 


2 


3 


4 


5 


6 




22 


18 


15 


12 


10J 


% 


New York to Baltimore 


34 


29 


23 


18 


15 


12 




23 


20 


18 


12 


10 


9 



1 Includes dumping from cars to vessels when for transshipment by water. 

'Includes switching charges of Bangor & Aroostook R. R. when not in excess of 30 cents. 



224 LNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

Freight rates and Delaware & Raritan Canal tolls on merchandise between Philadelphia 

and New York. 



Commodity. 



Machinery (1). . . 

Lumber (4) 

Hay (5) 

Roofing paper (5) 
Hides, green (5) . . 

Ore (6) 

Oilcake (6) 

Fertilizer (6) 

Cotton (4) 

Sugar (5) 

Manure (3) 



All-rail 
rates per 
100 pounds. 



22 
12 
10§ 

m 

10i 
9§ 

4 
4 

12 
10J 
5 



Canal 
freight 
rates per 
100 pounds. 



9 (5) 

8 (6) 

9 (5) 
9 (5) 
9 (5) 
8 (6) 
8 (6) 
8 (6) 



(5) 
(6) 



Canal tolls 
per 100 
pounds. 



8/10 

51/10 

8/10 

8/10 

8/10 

51/10 

5J/10 

51/10 



3 1/10 
1 51/10 



1 The freight rates include canal tolls. 

Freight rates and Chesapeake & Delaware Canal tolls on merchandise between Philadel- 
phia and Baltimore. 



Commodity. 



All-rail 
rates per 
100 pounds, 



Canal 
freight 
rates per 
100 pounds. 1 



Canal tolls 
per 100 
pounds. 



Machinery (1). . . 

Lumber (4) 

Hay (5) 

Roofing paper (5) 
Hides, green (5). . 

Ore (6) 

Oilcake (6) 

Fertilizers (6) 

Cotton (4) 

Sugar (5) 

Manure (3) 



23 
12 
10 
10 
10 
9 
9 
9 
12 
10 
18 



20 
10 

9 
9 
9 
8 
8 
8 

10 
9 

16 



5/10 



1 1/10 



7/10 
5/10 



7/10 



The freight rates include canal tolls. 



[Appendix 5.] 

Philadelphia, March 10, 1911. 

Mr. Wilfred H. Schopf, 

Secretary Committee on Traffic, etc. m 

Dear Sir: In reference to your inquiry about the amount of tonnage likely to be 
carried over the canal connecting Philadelphia and New York I would offer the fol- 
lowing : 

Figures have been made at different times in a conservative way by men interested 
in shipping as to tonnage and cost of same which have been based upon bulk cargoes, 
or, in other words, heavy commodities, taking the one commodity for a cargo. The 
shipping that I have been interested in on the Delaware River for the last 20 years 
has been the carrying of general merchandise, which takes in anything that can be 
shipped, from a farm product to a manufactured article. 

At the present time the farm products of New Jersey and Delaware during the heavy 
season, which is July and August, find their quick market in Philadelphia and Wil- 
mington. There are carried by water during these two months hundreds of thousands 
of baskets of truck directly from the farm to the open market. My company alone 
will average two to three thousand baskets per day for about 10 weeks, coming prin- 
cipally from the farms in and about Burlington, N. J., and Bristol, Pa. There are 
carried from the farms in the southern section in and about Gloucester County, N. J., 
in towed barges from thirty to fifty thousand baskets daily, which come to Philadelphia 
market. 

Besides this, the Gloucester Ferry, operating between Gloucester and Philadelphia, 
during a period of about 10 weeks, carries about 30,000 teams, each team with a carry- 
ing capacity averaging 100 baskets, which are dumped into Philadelphia market. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. Q. 225 



Also the Camden ferries, all combined, probably carry a like number of teams loaded 
with light truck. 

I give you these figures to show the vast amount of farm product that is being carried 
to the Philadelphia market from the New Jersey farms that would have a market in 
New York on a canal route where delivery could be made inside of 10 hours. The 
farmer would be interested, as he would have two markets instead of one for the sale 
of his product. At the present time, if New York is paying higher for farm products 
than Philadelphia, the farmer has to pack his product into freight cars, which are hot 
in summer time and unfit for this kind of shipment, and send it through to New York, 
where it arrives in such condition as to bring less than it might if carried by team or 
boat to Philadelphia. But if he could ship it by open barges, where it would not be 
closely covered and heated, New York would become a competitive market with Phil- 
adelphia for all kinds of farm produce. It is a known fact that at the present time 
farm produce is shipped in cars from southern New Jersey through to New York and 
Boston by rail. When there is not a solid train load it is held up at junction points 
and very often misses markets. Such delay in hot weather makes it unsalable, whereas 
if the canal were open and it could be gotten through within 10 or 12 hours this loss 
would not occur. 

In reference to manufactured products along the Delaware River, I wish to cite sev- 
eral cases that have arisen in the last year or two, one in particular — a shipment from 
the crockery plants at Trenton was being made up for San Francisco, Cal., and Port- 
land, Oreg. This shipment, consisting of about five carloads, was taken on board the 
boat at Trenton, brought to Philadelphia, and shipped by the Clipper Line from 
Philadelphia to San Francisco, which line took the shipment by all-water a long dis- 
tance around Cape Horn. While the time of delivery was very much longer by this 
route than by rail across the continent, still the saving in freight and insurance 
amounted to $700, so that the consignee was willing to lose the time. 

Again, a certain product manufactured at Trenton is being shipped daily to Chicago 
via the steamer route out of Trenton, all-water to Virginia, and then via railroad to 
Chicago. This shipment has to be transferred first via the company's team at Trenton, 
then aboard water lines from Trenton to Philadelphia, thence via outside steamer line 
from Philadelphia to Newport News, where it is loaded into freight cars and shipped 
by rail to Chicago. If this shipment were made all-rail out of Trenton it would be 
loaded from the machine into the freight car, locked, and sent directly through to 
destination, costing all-rail $1 per ton more than by the water and rail route. The 
water-carrying distances are very small compared to the distance by rail, but still 
this shows the saving to the consignee that is made when water routes can be used. 
There is very little difference in time via all-rail or via water and rail. In solid carloads, 
Trenton shipments will arrive in Chicago in about four days, while the water shipments 
will arrive in about six days; less, than carload shipments to the same place by water 
and rail will equal the all-rail in delivery. This is caused by the holding of the less 
than carload shipments to make up solid carloads. 

The advantage of the canal connecting New York and Philadelphia as to the saving 
of money to the manufacturer and to the consumer is an unknown quantity. No 
man to-day can figure the amount of money and actual saving of carrying of freight 
or the total worth or the time saved in transportation between the large cities that this 
water route will make. When the outside route is discontinued, the dangers of the 
sea cut out, it will mean that manufacturers will build their factories on the water 
fronts, where they can take the advantage of both rail and water transportation. 

The shipper often appears to be in the dark as to how to ship his goods to the best 
advantage. In a great many instances rates do not figure; it is a question of delivery. 
Where delivery can be made by water, the water lines carry freight that would other- 
wise go by express if they had to depend on rail, the delivery over the water lines 
being so much better than over the rail lines. 

Merchandise is now being shipped from Trenton to Boston via water that is marked 
and ordered to be shipped out of Boston to points in Maine via express. The shipper 
finds he can save the difference between express rates and water freight rates and still 
get a quick delivery at destination. Trenton is 35 miles nearer New York than Phila- 
delphia is, and yet shipments are being made to Philadelphia from plants at Trenton, 
to be reshipped to New York via steamer, taking that long outside route, and still 
saving time over rail freight; whereas, if the canal were in operation, this same product 
would be delivered in New York inside of six or seven hours. 

Instances can be quoted of all-water shipments between Trenton and Baltimore; 
for instance, floor tiling shipped from the factories at Morrisville, Pa., at 9 p. m. Sat- 
urday for the purpose of being placed on the floor of a hotel on Sunday (that being the 
only day of the week that work of this kind could be done). This shipment was placed 
aboard the steamer at Trenton on Saturday at 1 p. m., and was being laid on the floor 

22739°— H. Doc. 391, 62-2 15 



226 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



of the hotel on the next day, Sunday, at 7 a. m. This is not a rare occurrence, but is 
being done almost daMy over the all-water line from Trenton to Philadelphia and from 
Philadelphia to Baltimore. Manufactured products are leaving Trenton for the South, 
leaving the factories as late as 3 and 4 o'clock in the afternoon, arriving at Norfolk and 
Newport News inside of 48 hours, ready for distribution at those points. 
Respectfully, yours, 

H. F. Stetser. 



[Appendix 6.] 

Reports on the probable commercial influence of the proposed waterway upon 
Newark, N. J., Trenton, N. J., and Richmond, Va., have been received by this com- 
mittee from the Board of Trade of Newark, Chamber of Commerce of Trenton, and 
Chamber of Commerce of Richmond. These reports have been forwarded to Col. 
W. M. Black, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, New York City. 



[Appendix C 4.] 



STATEMENT BY WILLIAM C. MURPHEY, SECRETARY OP THE NEW JERSEY STATE SENATE. 



New Jersey State Senate, 

Office op the Secretary, 

January SO, 1911. 

Dear Sir: I am instructed by the Senate of the State of New Jersey to inform the 
Secretary of War that the senate has on this day introduced the following joint reso- 
lution: 

Whereas, at a meeting of the Philadelphia-Trenton-New York Deeper Waterways 
Association, held at the State house, in the city of Trenton, it was resolved that the 
governor of this State be requested to appoint a committee of five to cooperate on 
behalf of this State with a committee of 50 of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Asso- 
ciation to consider and report upon matters in connection with a proposed cooper- 
ation between the State of New Jersey and the Federal Government, looking toward 
the construction of a ship canal across New Jersey and the development of the 
inland waterways of this and other coast States, in accordance with which resolu- 
tion the governor did appoint Messrs. David Baird, Peter Campbell, Samuel Heil- 
ner, Benjamin F. S. Brown, and Frederick W. Donelly, as the members of such 
commission; and 

Whereas, the said commission has met from time to time to discuss the matters sub- 
mitted in accordance with the said resolution, and has received such information 
as could be afforded by the Federal Government with reference to the survey made 
by the engineers of the United States Army in such detail as the same is now per- 
fected; and 

Whereas, it is apparent that in order to bring about the undertaking of this important 
work by the Federal Government cooperation by the State of New Jersey is nec- 
essary and proper, since such cooperation on the part of the State is better calcu- 
lated to induce the Federal Government to undertake the construction of this 
canal; and 

Whereas, it is believed by the commission above referred to, upon information 
received from the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army, under whose 
direction said survey was made, that the right of way of the said canal, according 
to the survey made, will require about four thousand acres of land, the cost of which, 
including damage claims for water rights extinguished, is estimated to be about 
five hundred thousand dollars; and 

Whereas, it is believed that the benefits which will accrue to the State of New Jersey 
by reason of the construction of the proposed canal are a sufficient warrant for the 
cooperation of the State with the Federal Government, in the construction of said 
canal; and 

Be it resolved by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey, (1) That 
the construction of a canal across the State of New Jersey, connecting New York 
Bay with deep water in the Delaware River at Bordentown, New Jersey, by the 
Federal Government, is an enterprise which is likely to result in great benefit to this 
State and its inhabitants, in encouraging the various industries, of the State, and 
affording a more ready method of communication and transportation between points 
within this State and other points in this country and abroad, particularly in view 
of the importance of this canal as a necessary link in the intra-coastal system of inland 



IN TRAC O AST AL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 227 



waterways extending from Maine to Florida, which, when completed, will be of 
inestimable benefit to transportation along the entire Atlantic seaboard. 

(2) That in order to bring about the construction of this canal and its completion 
within as short a time as possible, on behalf of the people of this State, it is hereby 
declared that when the Government of the United States shall finally settle upon 
the route of the said canal and shall make provision for its construction by suitable 
appropriation, the State of New Jersey shall acquire the right of way for the said 
canal by purchase or condemnation from the owners thereof and cede the same to the 
Federal Government for the use of the Government in constructing and maintaining 
the said canal, upon condition that the said canal, when completed, shall be free and 
open to the commerce of the world, without tolls or charges for the passage of vessels 
or freight thereon; provided the right of way can be obtained by purchase or con- 
demnation for a sum not exceeding five hundred thousand dollars, or such sum as 
may be appropriated by the Legislature for that purpose at the time when such appro- 
priation and other legislation necessary to carry into effect the purposes of this 
resolution, shall become necessary and appropriate. 

(3) That a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded by the Secretary of the 
Senate to the honorable the Secretary of War. 

(4) This joint resolution shall take effect immediately. 

Respectfully, Wm. C. Murphey, 

Secretary. 

Hon. George L. von Meyer, 

Secretary of War, 



[Appendix C 5.] 

STATEMENT PROM MR. L. J. KANE, SECRETARY OP THE RIVERSIDE METAL CO., OP RIVER- 
SIDE, N. J. 

There is no public wharf; there is a wharf without railroad connection, concession 
for its use could be obtained without difficulty. There is no public land available 
for wharf construction. Water transportation would benefit a manufacturing com- 
munity of 5 square miles, population 10,000, and a farming community of 20 square 
miles, population 1,000. The freight rate by rail to New York is 15 cents per 100 
pounds; to Providence and Boston, 25 cents per 100 pounds. Water rates same as 
railroad. Ninety-nine per cent of freight is carried by rail, 1 per cent by water. 

Lack of proper connection with water lines is the cause of large percentage of rail 
shipments. 

STATEMENT FROM F. W. ROEBLING, SECRETARY OF JOHN A. ROEBLINg's SONS' CO., OF 

TRENTON, N. J. 

Can not see that it will be of great advantage to the city of Trenton. Vessels passing 
through the canal from New York would be obliged to come up the Delaware River 
about 6 miles and discharge at the river front at the lower end of the city. Practically 
all manufactories have been located so as to have the best railroad facilities which 
has taken them from one-half to 4 miles away from the river. Cartage charges must, 
therefore, overbalance any saving by water transportation. Continuance of the water- 
way far south would, in our judgment, be more advantageous to this city than the 
canal from New York to Bordentown, and then with moderate tolls on the Delaware 
and Raritan Canal, in connection with the canal from New York and the South to 
Bordentown it would, in our opinion, be of great advantage to Trenton. The Dela- 
ware and Raritan canal as it stands to-day would be of great benefit to Trenton were it 
not for excessive tolls charged. They make it impossible to operate transportation 
at a profit. 

In addition to the works at Trenton, employing 4,000 people, this company also 
operates a steel works at Roebling, N. J., with 2,500 hands. These works are 4 
miles below the outlet at Bordentown, and are located on the river. For this place 
the waterway south and north is likely to be of great advantage and importance, and 
if in the future the Delaware River is made navigable for 5,000-ton steamers, for- 
eign commerce would be available. 

We believe the contemplated inland waterway from New York to the far south 
would be of enormous value to great communities which are practically inland to-day, 
not on account of full cargoes so much as from small shipments from many places on 
or near its location. This kind of traffic is, of course, impossible for outside lines and 
is of slow growth and would depend on manufactories being built in the future. 



228 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, », C 



STATEMENT FROM J. WALTER MILLER, OF THE INDEPENDENT BRICK SELLING CO. OF 

TRENTON, N. J. 

We are manufacturers of brick and at the present time have a capacity of about 
40,000,000 per year. Under the present conditions our market is limited owing to the 
excessive freight rate by rail. Should this canal become a reality the world would be 
our market instead of a field within a radius of 50 miles. Our supply of clay is 
unlimited, and should we receive the benefit of this canal would immediately increase 
our capacity from 100 to 200 per cent. However, taking our present capacity we 
present the following facts: 

We consume about 20,000 tons of coal per year which is all received by rail at a 
higher freight rate than same could be received by water. Our outgoing shipments 
represent 125,000 tons. Owing to the depth of the present channel m the Delaware 
River we have been unable to get captains to give us rates by water, although both 
of our factories are in a position to use water deliveries. We have at the present time 
sidings at the factories for the receiving and shipping of material by rail, and docks 
for water delivery. 

To cite the difference between the freight rates on our commodity between rail and 
water would say, that our present rate by rail to New York is $1.90 per ton. Trenton 
shippers who have the use of the canal are paying a rate of $1 per ton on fancy pressed 
brick and a lesser rate on common brick, such as we manufacture. The present rate 
by rail to Philadelphia is 65 cents pet ton, and we have had a rate quoted of less than 
20 cents per ton by water, providing certain spots in the river were made available 
for navigation. 

We have had many inquiries, in fact, have had enough inquiries to take our entire 
output by water, but have been unable to do anything during the past several years. 
If we were to enjoy the use of a canal from our factories to New York and Philadelphia 
we would save at least $50,000 per year on our present freight rates by rail on out- 
going materials. This is based on our present capacity. Should the canal, however, 
be built we would have, as previously stated, the world for our market and will mate- 
rially increase our capacity, so that the saving will be problematic, figured on the 
quantity manufactured. Would estimate that if this canal is built, we can add as 
increased profits at least $100,000, which would be saved between the present rates 
by rail and rates by water. 

Another saving to us would be the elimination of many serious delays on railroad 
shipments. We have been held up at times from 10 days to 2 weeks in getting 
cars a distance of 35 miles. When taking the matter up with the railroad company 
we receive their usual reasons covering such cas'es, which of course does not help us 
in straightening the matter out with our dissatisfied customers. If this canal were 
built and the various spurs established from a main canal we could ship practically 
all of our output by water, as our market would be so extended that our present capacity 
would be inadequate to supply the demand to points that could be reached by water. 

STATEMENT OF T. S. UNDERBILL, OF WISTAR, UNDERHILL & CO., PHILADELPHIA, PA. 

The terminal facilities are held by individuals or corporations which are extended 
to all on equal terms subject only to the owner's convenience. 

Lumber is brought in by vessel to Philadelphia at vessel rates and hauled to various 
parts of the city or transferred into cars at a nominal charge for this transfer and taken 
to various parts of the city, enabling the purchasers to secure the material on the 
combined water rate to Philadelphia and shifting charge about Philadelphia at a 
lower cost than it could be brought to their siding if shipped by rail ; and this material 
is even shipped out into the suburbs for 6, 8, or 10 miles outside of city limits to 
advantage after being transferred from vessel to cars at Philadelphia. 

The rates vary, depending upon the point of shipment. Lumber comes here by 
rail and by water from Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Virginia, South Carolina, North 
Carolina, Maine, and Nova Scotia. The rates by water, as far as we are able to learn, 
would range anywhere from $1.50 to $2.50 and possibly $3 per thousand feet; at times 
less than by rail. There are terminals easy of access to the center of the city. The 
cost of hauling from water terminals would be about the same as that from railroad 
terminals. 

STATEMENT OF MR. CALVIN TOMKINS, COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DOCKS 

AND FERRIES OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK. 

Construing the term "terminal facilities" to mean such facilities as are afforded 
by car floats, transfer bridges, and railroad connections, it may be Stated that there 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 229 



are no such facilities owned by the public which are extended to all on equal terms. 
The various terminals are all controlled by corporations, either for their exclusive 
use, or by arrangement with railroads, etc., on terms previously agreed upon. 

There are terminal facilities held by private corporations, as well as practically 
all the trunk lines of railroads, which are located in the Boroughs of Manhattan, the 
Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, and Richmond, but I am unaware that they are extended 
to all on equal terms. 

There are a number of piers and bulkheads owned by the city which are available 
for public use, and there is space available for the construction of additional piers 
and bulkheads in the various boroughs, and the matter is being taken up by the 
commissioner of docks, who has ordered the construction of additional wharfage 
facilities at such localities where the demands of commerce require them. 

As stated before, all of the terminals are not open for public use and the following 
list of terminals is submitted: 

New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., One hundred and thirty-fifth to 

One hundred and forty-third Streets, North River, bulkhead, car float, and railroad. 
New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., Fifty-ninth to Seventieth Streets, 

North River, 8 piers, car float, and railroad. 
Pennsylvania Railroad Co., Thirty-seventh to Thirty-eighth Streets, North River, 

2 piers, car float, and railroad. 
New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., Thirty-fifth to Thirty-seventh 

Streets, North River, 1 pier, car float, and railroad. 
New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., Thirtieth to Thirty-seventh Streets, 

North River, 4 piers, car float, and railroad. 
Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad, Twenty-eighth Street, North River, 

1 pier, car float. 

Erie Railroad Co., Twenty-eighth to Twenty-ninth Streets, North River, transfer 
bridge and railroad. 

Terminal Warehouse Co., Twenty-seA^enth to Twenty-eighth Streets, North River, 

transfer bridge and railroad. 
Erie Railroad Co., Twenty -seventh to Twenty-eighth Streets, North River, transfer 

bridge and railroad. 

Lehigh Valley Railroad Co., Twenty-sixth to Twenty-seventh Streets, North River, 

transfer bridge and railroad. 
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., Twenty-fifth to Twenty-sixth Streets, North River, 

transfer bridge and railroad. 
Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, Leroy Street, North River, 1 pier, car float. 
Central Railroad Co. of New Jersey, Pier 32, foot Canal Street, 1 pier, car float. 
Pennsylvania Railroad Co., Hubert to Vestry Streets, 3 piers, car float. 
New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., Harrison Street, North River, 1 pier, 

car float. 

Baltimore & Ohio, Jay Street, North River, 1 pier, car float. 

Erie Railroad Co., Chambers Street, North River, 2 piers, car float. 

New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., Barclay Street (Pennsylvania Rail- 
road), 2 piers, car float. 

Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, Dey Street, North River, 1 pier, car float. 

Central Railroad Co. of New Jersey, Albany to Cedar Streets, North River, 2 piers, 
car float. 

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., Rector Street, North River, 1 pier, car float. 
Pennsylvania Railroad Co., Morris to Rector Streets, 2 piers, car float. 
Lehigh Valley Railroad Co., Battery Place to Morris Street, 2 piers, car float. 
Pennsylvania Railroad Co., Battery Place, 1 pier, car float. 

New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., Broad Street, East River, 1 pier, 
car float 

Erie Railroad Co., Coenties Slip, East River, 1 pier, car float. 
Long Island Railroad Co., James Slip, East River, 2 piers, car float. 
Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, Catherine Slip, East River, 1 pier, car float. 
New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., Rutgers Slip, East River, 1 pier, 
car float. 

New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., Montgomery Street, East River, 3 
piers, car float. 

Lehigh Valley Railroad Co., One hundred and twenty-fourth Street, bulkhead, car 
float. 

Pennsylvania Railroad Co., One hundred and twenty-fifth Street, bulkhead, car float. 
New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., Jefferson Street, 2 piers, car float. 



230 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



, Bronx. 

New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., East One hundred and sixty-seventh 
Street, Hudson River, transfer bridge, railroad. 

Lehigh Valley Railroad Co., East One hundred and fiftieth Street, Hudson River, 
transfer bridge, railroad. 

Delaware, Lackawanna & Weetern, East One hundred and fiftieth Street, Hudson 
River, transfer bridge, railroad. 

Harlem Transfer Co., Railroad Avenue and Mott Haven Canal, transfer bridge, rail- 
road. 

Central Railroad Co. of New Jersey, Lincoln and Third Avenues, transfer bridge, 
railroad. 

New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., Willis Avenue, transfer bridge, 
railroad. 

New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Co., East One hundred and forty-first 

Street, transfer bridge, railroad. 
New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co., Cabot Street Yard, transfer bridge, 

railroad. 

Queens. 

Long Island Railroad Co., Borden Avenue to Sixth Street, transfer bridge, car float, and 
railroad. 

Long Island Railroad Co., Newtown Creek to Dutch Kills, 2 piers, car float, and railroad. 

Brooklyn. 

Green Street, 1 pier, car float. 

North Fourth to North Tenth Street, 4 piers, transfer bridge and railroad. 

New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Company, North First Street, 2 piers, 

transfer bridge and railroad. 
Delaware, Lackawanna & Western, Wallabout Channel, transfer bridge, car float. 
New York Central & Hudson River Railroad Company, Wallabout Basin, 1 pier, car 

float. 

Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Wallabout Basin, car float. 
Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, Wallabout Basin, car float. 
Erie Railroad Company, Wallabout Basin, car float. 
Jay Street Terminal, Jay Street, transfer bridge, car float. 
New York Dock Company, Baltic Street, piers, transfer bridge, car float. 
New York Dock Company, State Street-Fulton Street, piers, transfer bridge, car float. 
Bush Terminal Company, Fifty-first Street-Fortieth Street, piers, transfer bridge, car 
float. 

Pennsylvania, New York & Long Island Railroad Company, Sixty-fifth Street, piers, 
transfer bridge, car float. 

Richmond. 

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, St. George, piers, transfer bridge, car float. 
American Dock & Trust Company, Tompkinsville, piers, transfer bridge, car float. 

STATEMENT BY MR. HENRY B. HERBERT, OP NEW YORK. 

It seems to me that as an important aid to the commerce of the country, the project 
has been wisely conceived. Under the operation of this all-water route it will not 
only be possible to establish a minimum freight rate for transportation but it will insure 
some reliability in the delivery of goods at points of destination. The possibility of 
an immense flow of interchanging commerce via these waterways is apparent and 
'justifies the undertaking. 

STATEMENT BY MR. GEORGE E. BARTOH, PRESIDENT OF THE PHILADELPHIA BOURSE, 

PHILADELPHIA, PA. 

The present traffic by the inland waterway between the Delaware River and New 
York Bay is exceedingly small. Conditions with which you are perfectly familiar 
account for the insignificant volume of the present traffic. I am personally familiar 
with a large portion of the route, having made several trips through the canal, and you 
will undoubtedly agree with the suggestion that no canal, located as is the present canal, 
and with locks, gates, and basins of the dimensions of those found on the present canal, 
can be expected either to carry a reasonable share of traffic or to develop any volume 
of business. 



TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C, 231 



There are certain classes of improvements which, it seems to me, must be considered 
from a viewpoint other than that of the existing conditions; in other words, we must 
consider them from the broad standpoint of the effect of the improvement upon the 
future conditions. To illustrate clearly what I mean, if the first improvements to the 
Sault Ste. Marie had been conditioned upon the traffic then existing through that 
waterway there would have been no improvement made whatsoever, as prior to the 
improvement there was no traffic. In the same way, if the transcontinental railroads 
had been built solely upon the traffic existing prior to their construction, and that had 
been assumed to be the volume of traffic that they would have after construction, there 
would have been no transcontinental railroads built. 

It is a well-known and thoroughly proven fact that facilities create business, and it 
is impossible to conceive that an improved, modern waterway of proper width and 
depth, with proper entrance gates and locks, if such be required, between the New 
England section and New York district, with its millions of population, and Phila- 
delphia and the southern territory to be served from Philadelphia, would not carry a 
volume of business that would amply compensate for the construction of such a water- 
way. 

It is true that the New Jersey canal would not come up to the fullest measure of 
success until it had as a feeder an improved link connecting the Delaware Bay with 
the Chesapeake Bay, but even without such a link Philadelphia and the other towns 
on the Delaware River, with the immediately tributary country, ship an enormous 
tonnage of merchandise to New York and New England points. Much of this now 
goes by rail, and a large tonnage goes by water. Just what percentage of the present 
rail tonnage would seek an improved inland-waterway route it is impossible to calcu- 
late, but it is certain that at somewhat lower rates and with the certainty of delivery 
which attaches to the movement of freight over such waterways, a large proportion of 
such presently moved rail freight would go by the inland waterway. Exactly the 
same line of reasoning applies to the present large movement by vessel outside the 
Capes. 

Attention is invited to the special reports of New York Produce Exchange, Trenton 
Chamber of Commerce, Board of Trade of Newark, and Board of Trade of Camden. 



[Appendix C 6.] 

Board of Trade, 
Camden, N. J., November 2, 1910. 

Dear Sir: I am in receipt of your several favors of August 30 and October 25, and 
beg to take up and answer your questions as far as possible as contained in your latter 
letter, as follows: 

1. The city of Camden is now building a public wharf at the foot of Cooper Street 
(opposite Arch Street, Philadelphia), and has purchased and owns land at Spruce 
and Clinton Streets, upon which it is proposed to build another public wharf. 

2. A line of the Pennsylvania Railroad passes along the end of the Cooper Street 
Wharf, but as yet no plans have been made to run a switch out on the wharf. There 
are, however, no obstacles to such being done as soon as conditions warrant. 

3. There are no wharves, as far as I know, held by individuals or corporations which 
are extended to all on equal terms, except, possibly, the old sugar refinery wharf at 
the foot of Linden Street, now owned by Mr. Arthur Dorrance. 

4. There are several tracts of river front property not yet owned by the railroad cor- 
porations which may be purchased on very favorable terms. Several of these tracts 
are in the southern section of the city and have a deep water front. 

5. There are a number of more or less modern wharves owned by and held for the 
exclusive use of such corporations as the New York Shipbuilding Co., the Licorice 
Works, the Chalk Works, and the public-service corporation, and also for the use of 
several lumber companies. 

6. Including Philadelphia and its suburbs, not less than three and a half millions of 
people receive the benefit of water transportation in this vicinity. 

7. We can not give you the freight rates by rail unless we knew from what points 
these rates were to apply. 

8. The same is true of the freight rates by water. 

9. The industries are chiefly located on or adjacent to either the Delaware River or 
Cooper Creek, but those industries located along the Delaware River from Cooper 
Point to the mouth of Cooper Creek, and along Cooper Creek from its mouth to Federal 
Street, have no railroad facilities, and the average haul to the nearest railroad siding 
would be about one-half mile. 

10. See paragraph 9. 



232 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



11. There is no record of the amount of package freight available. Arrangements 
are being made with the Delaware River Navigation Co. to have their boats stop at 
the Cooper Street Wharf, when completed, to load and discharge freight and passen- 
gers for all upriver points, and also with the Wilson Line to take on passengers and 
freight for Chester and Wilmington. In this connection, attached please find letters 
received some time ago by our committee when the agitation for a public wharf was 
begun. From these letters you will see that there would be available a considerable 
amount of package business if a public landing and good channel facilities were fur- 
nished. We did not at that time go as far as to take in the question of New York traffic, 
which would no doubt bring forward stronger letters. 

12. It is impossible at the present time to obtain the proportion of freight carried 
by rail and water accurately, but it has been estimated by a good authority that about 
7| per cent of our traffic is carried by water. 

13. With regard to the difference between the freight by rail and water, the chief 
cause for this is the fact of not having sufficient depth of water on the New Jersey side 
of the Delaware River or on Cooper Greek. 

When the last survey of the Delaware River was made, everything was done for 
Philadelphia at the expense of Camden. Prior to that work being done, we had from 
12 to 15 feet of water, practically all along the New Jersey shore, but now in many 
places north of Clinton Street there is not over 6 feet. 

Statistics as to the water traffic along Cooper Creek, which is tributary to the Dela- 
ware River, may be of interest, and we herewith attach a copy of such statistics as 
have been recently furnished the Engineers office at Wilmington. 

In our city we have numerous factories, whose entire product is sent to New York 
for distribution, and a canal connecting the Delaware River and New York Bay would 
mean great saving in several respects. It will, however, only be useful to the great 
majority of communities located alone: its course, provided their interests are not side- 
tracked for the benefit of the larger cities. Should this channel be made to a depth of 
16 feet from Bordentown south, and this 16 feet be provided in the center of the river 
without dredging an equal channel to the public docks along the route, it would be 
impossible for these boats to make intermediate landings, and, consequently, the 
improvement would be of little use except for through traffic. 

The savings to be effected would be — 

First. In time. — While rail is quicker, there is always the liability of greatly delayed 
shipments. Lately, we have had our attention called to rail shipments in less than 
carload, taking 5 to 6 days and even 10 days to arrive in New York from Philadelphia 
or Camden, which delay was due to the car being sidetracked or lost. This can not 
happen by boat, for when a boat starts out it usually maintains its speed and its time 
of delivery can be counted upon accurately. 

Second. In freight rates. — At the present time we have a rail freight rate on first- 
class merchandise in less than carload of 22 cents per hundred and to New York a 
water rate of 20 cents per hundred. On the rail rate, the merchandise is to be deliv- 
ered on the platform of the railroad company, whereas in the water rate the rate applies 
from the mill door to the wharf in New York, which is equivalent to at least 4 to 5 
cents per hundred pounds for expense of hauling to the docks. 

Trusting that this information may be of some use to you, I am, 
Yours, very truly, 

Charles S. Boyer, 
Chairman Waterways Committee. 

Col. W. M. Black, 

Corps of Engineers. 

Childs Grocery Co., 
Camden, N. J., June 12, 1908. 

Dear Sir: We have been trying for some time to think of a plan by which to bring 
the very great necessity of having a Camden landing for the up and down river boats 
before the proper authorities, but up to our conversation this afternoon we had formed 
none, that taken single handed, looked anything like success. It would seem to us that 
a city growing as ours would, as a matter of pride if not necessity, have at least one or 
more public landings of this sort for the accommodation of our own industries instead 
of compelling all who do any shipping to go to Philadelphia. 

It is quite unlikely that anyone of your committee has any idea of the extent of 
this traffic, and had I sufficient notice I could have said very definitely just what our 
shipping amounted to by water, which if we had facilities could all be done from 
Camden at a very great saving of time, to say nothing of expense. To give you an idea 
of the points to which we ship I will name the different towns to which we sjiip via 
water: 

Mount Holly, Burlington, Bordentown, Bristol (3 stores), Trenton (9 stores), Bridge- 
ton, Wilmington (3 stores), Salem, Riverside, and New Castle. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 233 



These 21 stores are, of course, all outgoing. We also want to speak of incoming in 
the fall. We have on a number of occasions had to refuse offers of canned goods at 
very much lower prices by boat than rail because no suitable landing was to be had. 
We might mention many other ways. Lack of accommodation in this respect is a 
very great drawback to us in shipping and receiving goods and a considerable loss as 
well 

It will be a very great pleasure to give any information or support to your com- 
mittee which they might ask to assist them in this movement. 
We are, very respectfully, 

Geo. R. Pelouge, Treasurer. 

Mr. C. S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, Camden, N. J. 



Childs Grocery Co., 
Camden, N. J., June 16, 1908. 

Dear Sir. In my letter of the 9th instant, it was impossible, for lack of time, to 
explain just the extent of what I called incoming shipments; also just what they 
were. In the first place during the fall months our receipts of canned goods are 
very heavy. Beginning with say, the middle of July and continuing until the latter 
part of October, 1907, we received in round numbers 85,000 cases of canned vege- 
tables, many of which (surely two-thirds) were shipped from New Jersey, Delaware, 
and Maryland. In a number of cases it would have saved quite a sum of money 
had we been able to receive shipments by the way of water to Camden. Only 
yesterday we received notice of 100 barrels of pickles consigned to us at Bush Line 
Pier, Philadelphia. This means cartage of same from there, making five loads, and 
the time, etc., for team. To-day we are having 500 cases of baked beans hauled 
from the Ericsson Pier at the packer's cost. Now we will, for the moment, forget 
the expense. What must be the impression a shipper has of a city with a hundred 
thousand population and not a public wharf on a river front of about 3 miles. How 
many small towns on this river can you call to mind that have no public landing? 
Very few that I can recall. This state of affairs can not help being a detriment to 
the growth of our town, and until we do have every facility for the manufacturer 
and shipper we can hardly expect to keep pace with our competitors in cities 
located in progressive up-to-date towns. 

If we can be of further assistance to you in what we think a long stride in the direc- 
tion of a prosperous, up-to-date city, we will be very glad to do so, if you will let 
us know. 

Wishing you all possible success, we are, respectfully, yours, 

Geo. R. Pelouge, Treasurer. 

Mr. C. S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, Camden, N. J. 



C. B. Coles & Sons Co., 

Camden, Mi J., March 29, 1909. 

Dear Sir: As per your request of to-day, the amount of lumber received on our 
wharf from February, 1908, to February, 1909, is as follows: 

Tons of freight 12, 435, 075 

Value $149,618.26 

Steamers number.. 4 

Sailing vessels do 19 

Barges do 39 

We hope this will be of advantage to you in making up your statistics for the deep- 
water channel. 

We have a large car trade which would average about 50 percent of our boat trade, 
which is shipped direct from the manufacturers to the consumer, not stopping in Cam- 
den in transit, and as much more is shipped direct to our yard and hauled out by teams. 
The interchange of cars by the different railroads over the Belt Line would save 
heavy carting and would decrease the cost to the consumer. 
Very respectfully, 

C. B. Coles & Sons Co. 

Mr. Louis T. Derousse, 

Secretary of Board oj Trade, 

Camden, W. J. 



234 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



C. B. Coles & Sons Co., 

June 9, 1908. 

Dear Sir: I have letter. relating to river-front improvement for Camden. 

Allow me to suggest the board recommending to extend Cooper Street Dock out 
into the river so that it will make a good landing for up-river boa ts to take on passengers 
and freight to be distributed to the different towns along the river and creeks. 

I suggest the Van Sciver Line of steamers take freight from Philadelphia wharf 
and distribute it to the different towns along the river until it gets to Rancocas Creek; 
then deliver to the different landings along the creek till it gets to Hainesport; then 
it is a short haul from Hainesport to Mount Holly. 

Much of the small freight for Moorestown and Mount Holly was delivered to Moores- 
town and Mount Holly by express wagons that met the boat that delivers at the differ- 
ent landings, which makes it very handy for people along the line, and I will say 
especially for Moorestown. If we had such a place on this side of the river, it would 
save us much time crossing the river and likewise the expense. 

I would recommend that you urge council to take action in this matter. 
Very truly, yours, 

Charles B. Coles. 

Mr. Chas. S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, 

Camden, N. J. 



Gately & Hurley Co., 

Camden, N. J., June 9, 1908. 

Dear Sir: Regarding the proposed public wharf for Camden will say that we regard 
it as an absolute necessity to the freight handlers of this city. 

We have heard several of our large shippers talk on the subject and they are all of 
the opinion that a public wharf would facilitate the handling of freights and be a 
cheaper and safer means of shipping. 

As for ourselves we can safely say that if we were able to ship direct from Camden 
by boat we could serve our customers more satisfactorily and save considerable 
money. 

We are daily receiving and shipping goods to Burlington, Trenton, Pennsgrove, 
Salem, Chester, Wilmington, and other points on the Delaware River, or that can be 
reached by boat service on the river connecting with smaller channels. We also 
receive considerable freight from New York, Boston, and other points that we would 
like to have forwarded by water. Considerable of it now comes this way, but we are 
obliged to send to Philadelphia for most of it. 

It appears that one of the New York boat lines, realizing the value of Camden 
patronage and not having any wharf here where they could land their boats, they 
have made arrangements with one of our express companies to haul all Camden 
freight over here. 

This was a very good move on their part, but how much nicer it would be if the 
goods were unloaded in Camden and we could send our own teams for them. We 
believe that we would save 24 hours, and nowadays not only every hour but every 
minute is valuable to a business man, and the sooner he can get goods to his customers, 
in making shipments or in receiving shipments to deliver to him, the better off will 
he be. 

We feel satisfied that a public wharf will be a great benefit to the business and 
manufacturing interests already located in our city, and it may be an inducement 
for others who would locate here, if they could load the goods they manufacture on 
boats, the same as they do in other cities. 

Trusting that you will be successful in making arrangements for a public wharf, 
we are, 

Yours, truly, Gately & Hurley Co. 

Mr. C. S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, 

Camden, N. J. 



TNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 235 



Gately & Hurley Co., 

Camden, N. J., June 16, 1908. 

Dear Sir: Replying to your favor of recent date, wherein you wish us to give you 
an estimate on the amount of goods shipped up and down the river, will say, we have 
figured it out as close as we can and find that about from $15,000 to $18,000 worth of 
goods are shipped by us to different points on the Delaware River that can be reached 
by boat. Thfs could be increased very materially had we the facilities for doing so. 

We would consider a public wharf for Camden one of the greatest accommodations 
Camden could give for the benefit of its business and manufacturing industries, and 
sincerely trust you can influence the city fathers to build a wharf suitable for the 
landing of not only river boats but ocean-going steamers. 
Yours, very truly, 

William Leonard Hurley, President. 

Mr. Chas. S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, 

Camden, N. J. 

Ronalds & Johnson Co., 
Camden, N. J., June 13, 1908. 

Dear Sir: We are losing a large number of orders because of the lack of water 
transportation from Camden. This applies particularly to up-river points. The 
greater number of our customers along the upper Delaware prefer water shipments. 
Camden interests would be vastly benefited if we had a public dock where the up- 
river boats could stop. We are unable at short notice to give you any reliable data 
as to tonnage, etc., but will take this up later and advise you fully. 

Yours, respectfully, Goulick. 

Mr. C. S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, 

Camden, N. J. 



Warren Webster & Co., 
Camden, N. J., June 15, 1908. 

Dear Sir: We acknowledge receipt of your favor of June 11, and would say that we 
are very much interested in anything that would tend toward the improvement of 
the business facilities of our city, and it would be an accommodation to us if we could 
land our goods on a dock in Camden for the various steamship companies to collect the 
same, rather than to ferry them across the river. 

Would say,' however, that, as regards to merely local shipping, we have practically 
nothing — receiving only a few castings from Chester at odd times throughout the year. 

The following is the approximate tonnage shipped by us via the various steamship 
companies from Philadelphia, covering the past year, including May, 1908: 

Tons. 



Ericsson Line to Baltimore 6 \ 

Clyde Line to New York 2\ 

Clyde Line to Norfolk , 33 

Merchants & Miners' Transportation Co. to Boston 25 

Merchants & Miners' Transportation Co. via Savannah 5 

Export shipments to London, England 3 



We receive considerable incoming freight also, but the majority of this is by rail, 
which is brought about by the very meager water transportation facilities which we 
have for goods which are incoming. 

We deal with a foundry at Bridgeton, N. J., which could ship to us by water should 
there be a satisfactory water service with a wharf in Camden. 

As we said before, we are heartily in favor of improvement in the waterways through 
the whole eastern coast of this country and anything which would facilitate economical 
transportation would be appreciated by us. 

Yours, very truly, Warren Webster* & Co. 

Mr. Chas. S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, 

Camden, N. J. 



236 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Keystone Leather Co., 

Camden, N. J., June 12, 1908. 

Dear Sir: We are in receipt of your favor of the 11th inst., in reference to the 
demand made by the Camden shippers for a public dock along the Delaware River 
front, at which the up and down river steamboats will stop and take up or leave 
freight for or from these points, thus avoiding the necessity of hauling of such shipments 
to Philadelphia. 

This would be a very great benefit to us, as we ship considerable merchandise in the 
way of finished leather to Bristol, Pa. On a general estimate, would say, that we 
ship about 1 ton daily. 

Trusting that you will meet with success in having the steamboats stop at a central 
wharf in Camden, we are, 

Very truly, yours, C. A. Reynolds, President. 

Mr. Charles S. Boyer, 

Chairman Waterways Committee, 

Camden, N. J. 



statistics of cooper creek. 

The importance of Cooper Creek as a carrier, or possible carrier, of shipping is best 
exhibited from the following figures: 



Number of vessels arriving and departing in 1909 . 2, 400 

Net tonnage of vessels arriving and departing in 1909 651, 260 

Actual tonnage of merchandise arriving and departing in 1909 244, 222 

Actual value of merchandise arriving and departing in 1909 $2, 073, 188. 60 

Capital invested in industries located along Cooper Creek $9, 890, 500. 00 

Number of employees in the industries located along Cooper Creek. . . 5, 377 

Total actual tonnage arriving and departing for 1906, 1907, 1908, and 

1909 908, 043 

Total actual value of tonnage arriving and departing for 1906, 1907, 

1908, and 1909 $7, 866, 186. 40 

At a difference in freight rate of 30 cents per ton, the saving effected by 

this waterway has been, in four years $272, 412. 90 

The saving on coal receipts for the year 1909 over the rail rate was $9, 933. 40 



If the boats could have been loaded to their full capacity the actual saving would 
have been 25 per cent in excess of the above figures. 

The chief commodities shipped and received by the various industries along the 
creek consist of coal, chemicals, pipe, building stone, sand and clay, oil, lumber, 
corn, salt, hay, and manure. 

As to the difference between rail and water rates, the following replies to our inquiries 
from the mills located along the creek will prove interesting. Since these replies were 
strictly confidential, they are designated by numbers: 

No. 1003, about 65 per cent more by rail than on water freights. 

No. 1007, 3 cents per hundredweight on oils. 

No. 1008, $2,560 on 2,500 tons, or $1,024 per ton additional. 

No. 1009, 33 cents per ton on coal additional by rail than water. 

No. 1011, 30 cents per ton on coal additional by rail than water. 

No. 1012, $1,350.60 on 9,004 tons, or 15 cents per ton additional on building mate- 
rials by rail. 



[Appendix C 7.] 

New York Produce Exchange, 

New York, December 3, 1910. 

Dear Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your letter of November 30 
in regard to the proposed line of canal across New Jersey connecting the waters of 
Raritan Say and the Delaware River, and also am in receipt from Mr. Welding Ring 
of your letter of the same date addressed to him. On presentation of these communi- 
cations to the board of managers of the exchange, the whole matter was referred to the 
president with power. 

For precisely the reasons you suggest, I quite agree with you that the question is 
one in which the merchants of New York should take an active interest, and I will 
take the matter in hand personally and see if I can not arouse interest enough to draw 
forth some expression that may be of value to you. I feel that in all public expressions 
on public questions I must represent the opinions of the members so far as it is possible 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 237 



to ascertain them and not permit my personal opinions and judgment to stand as that 
of the exchange. For this reason I will study the question from the standpoint of the 
exchange and communicate the results to you as fairly, as impartially, and as soon as 
possible. 

I regret exceedingly that you have received such an unfavorable impression con- 
cerning the action in the matter already taken by the exchange, and for the purpose 
of removing that impression I inclose herewith a copy of the original resolutions 
adopted by the canal committee, with an extract from proceedings of the board of 
managers covering the action of the board thereon and the final resolution adopted 
by the canal committee . The purpose of the board in referring the original resolution 
back to the canal committee was that if our exchange volunteered to your board any 
communication on the subject it should make a strong effort to meet the conditions 
to your requests as contained in paragraph 14 of your letter of August 30 addressed to 
Mr. Welding Ring. During the debate in the canal committee over the adoption of 
the final resolution, I understand that one or two members referred to the fact that a 
ship canal from New York to Philadelphia would have a tendency to deprive New 
York of one of the great advantages it will gain through the completion of the new 
barge canal by the State of New York. New York now suffers from a railroad differ- 
ential against it in favor of Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and other competing 
grain export ports, and the advantage we will gain by the completion of the new barge 
canal will tend to put New York on an equality with those competing ports, and the 
thought in the minds of the debaters was that New York would simply lose one of the 
very advantages for which it built the barge canal if this new intracoastal canal makes 
it possible for the competing ports to utilize the barge canal against us. 

These statements in debate are the only justification for the impression you evidently 
have received. The matter was originally brought before us by Mr. Welding Ring, 
who turned over to me your letter to him dated August 30, which, because of its general 
character, invited action by our exchange, and the results were communicated to Mr. 
Ring at his request. 

Very respectfully, yours, E. R. Carhart, President. 

Col. W. M. Black, Corps of Engineers. 



[Resolution adopted at a meeting of the committee on canals of the New York Produce Exchange held 

Nov. 14, 1910.] 

Resolved, That the committee on canals report to the board of managers that they 
are unable to find data on which to base the information desired by Col. Black. 



[Extract from proceedings of board of managers at a meeting held Nov. 3, 1910.] 

Report of canal committee embodying a resolution favoring the construction of 
proposed inland canal across the State of New Jersey to connect New York Harbor 
with the Delaware River as outlined in communication of Col. W. M. Black, of the 
Engineer Corps, United States Army, was read, and on motion the matter was referred 
back to the canal committee for further consideration and definite answers to the 
requests made by Col. Black. 



(Resolutions adopted at a meeting of the committee on canals of the New York Produce Exchange held 

Oct. 27, 1910.] 

Resolved, That the committee on canals favor the construction of a sea-level canal 
across the State of New Jersey, connecting the harbor of New York with the Delaware 
River. The dimensions to be not less than 18 feet depth of water and having a bot- 
tom width of not less than 125 feet; in accordance with one of the estimates made in 
Col. Black's letter dated August 30, 1910. 

Be it further resolved, That the committee on canals respectfully request the adop- 
tion by the board of managers of a resolution of similar import and that it be sent to 
Col. W. M. Black, Corps of Engineers, United States Army, senior member of the 
board. 



New York Produce Exchange, 

New York, February 7, 1911. 

Dear Sir: Referring to your several communications in connection with the pro- 
posed canal to connect the harbor of New York with the Delaware River, we have 



238 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



been giving this matter very considerable attention and study in order to arrive at a 
fair consideration as to its requirements for commercial purposes. 

The New York Produce Exchange has always gone on record as favoring all methods 
of water transportation, and particularly those by canal, believing that this is the 
cheapest method for transportation of bulk products, and that it has a strong influence 
in the matter of freight rates charged by the railroads. 

The New York Produce Exchange very early advocated the building of the New 
York Barge Canal from Buffalo to Albany, which is now under construction, and which 
we anticipate will be completed in 1914 or 1915. With this great work finished, there 
is no doubt we will again see a much larger volume of trade coming by water than at 
the present time. The West will avail very largely of this improved means of trans- 
portation, and with the much larger barges that will be operated on the canals the 
cost of transportation will be correspondingly reduced. 

In your letter you have asked us various questions that we find it impossible to 
answer with any definiteness. We have gone through our statistics showing volume 
of produce handled by the Erie Canal and the portion that comes to New York, and 
while this is large, the total for 1910 being over 3,000,000 tons, a large portion of which 
reached this city, yet it is impossible for us to know how much of this traffic would 
pass on through the proposed canal to the Delaware River. There is nothing in our 
records that gives us any information or data on which to base any calculations, and 
it therefore must be a matter entirely of opinion and not of any certainty. 

With the opening of the Barge Canal, and completion of the Serieca and Cayuga 
Lake Canal, we are confident that a very large trade will develop in the two items of 
salt and cement, and many anticipate that this will run into a million or more tons 
very soon after opening of the canal. 

There is also a large amount of lumber which will naturally come forward by this 
cheap waterway route, and many of the more bulky and cheap manufactured lines in 
the West will seek New York over the Barge Canal. 

As these same articles will be in large demand for Philadelphia and other southern 
ports, it is reasonable to suppose that they will be carried through by the can.il barges 
in bulk, and supply the requirements of all places to the south of New Yoris. 

You no doubt are aware that the New York Canal is built with the expectation that 
barges of 1,000 tons capacity will be operated on it, and that many of these will be pro- 
pelled by their own power, so that they could readily pass through the canal to the 
Delaware River without towage. It is our opinion that much business would be devel- 
oped in the lines mentioned, and no doubt many others would also contribute. 

As regards traffic coming from Philadelphia to New York, we are not in position to 
give any forecast of its probabilities, but there would be many lines of manufactured 
goods that would seek this method of transportation. As the proposed canal would 
pass through New Jersey, it would develop many industries along the line of the canal, 
and these would furnish traffic to move in both directions. 

We have noted your views that you consider a canal with a depth of 12 feet and a 
width of 125 feet would meet the requirements of traffic, at least for a long period, and 
it is our view that a canal of this size would be amply large for any trade that might 
avail of it. This, however, is an engineering problem that you can best judge of, 
though in view of the size of the New York Barge Canal we believe the one pro- 
posed for the Delaware River would be as large as necessary for any traffic that 
might come from the West and down the Hudson River. 

There will also be a large volume of trade moving through Long Island Sound, and, 
we think, very considerable originating in New York and Brooklyn that will be ready 
to avail of the cheaper transportation by canal to Philadelphia and the South. Just 
how great this will be is beyond our power to estimate, but the volume will be large. 

We are very much impressed with the idea that it is wise to have a complete inland 
waterway connecting the East with the South all along our coast. We believe, how- 
ever, that work ought not to be undertaken on any section of the waterway unless 
there is some practical assurance that the whole enterprise will be completed. We 
believe further that there are other projects that ought to be completed before any 
work on this canal is undertaken. 

Regretting our inability to give you the definite information asked for, we remain 
dear sir, 

Yours, faithfully, E. R. Carhart, 

President. 
Henry B. Herbert, 
Col. W. M. Black, Chairman of Canal Committee. 

Corps of Engineers, 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 239 



[Appendix C 8.] 

Trenton Chamber op Commerce, 

Office of Secretary, 
Trenton, N. J., February 2, 1911. 
Dear Sir: We beg to submit herewith a report for the Trenton Chamber of Com- 
merce and the Philadelphia-Trenton-New York Deeper Waterway Association on the 
New Jersey State Canal, these organizations representing the business interests of 
the city of Trenton and adjacent territory. The population of the city of Trenton, 
according to the recent census, was 97,655. It is a manufacturing city of great impor- 
tance. The majority of these manufacturers are large shippers of high and low grade 
freight; therefore, we, representing these interests, are particularly interested in the 
project of the proposed intracoastal canal, connecting New York and Philadelphia. 
We must reach other cities with the least possible cost of transportation, and if we are 
to be a city keeping pace with the others in our commercial relations, the raw materials 
for our factories and the coarse-grade freights must come to us at the lowest possible 
costs. 

We endeavor to point out in this report the commercial necessity for the canal and 
what advantages would be derived by the local shippers in the event it is constructed. 
The total tonnage for the year 1909, by official reports, in and out bound freight, was 
2,269,271 tons, classified as follows: 

By rail, 1,861,125 tons; by canal, 308,946 tons; by Delaware River, 99,200 tons. 

The proportion of freight carried by means of water transportation, according to 
these figures, is 25 per cent, including, of course, both canal and river traffic. If 25 
per cent of the present tonnage of Trenton is carried by means of water transportation, 
with inadequate facilities for handling and at a prohibitive rate, it is safe to assume 
that a large proportion of the remaining 75 per cent of the total tonnage of Trenton 
now carried by rail will be carried by water, with improved water transportation 
facilities, namely, the completion of the 12-foot channel in the Delaware River and 
the proposed intracoastal canal. 

As evidence of this, we present herewith a report submitted at the request of the 
senate investigating committee of the New Jersey Legislature by the Trenton Chamber 
of Commerce. This report gives a summary of the result of a postal-card canvass con- 
ducted by this organization, and have been entered on the official records of the 
committee authorizing the same. 

REPORT OF POSTAL-CARD CANVASS MADE BY THE TRENTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR 
THE SENATE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE OF NEW JERSEY STATE LEGISLATURE ON THE 
DISUSE OF THE DELAWARE & RARITAN CANAL. 

On March 7, 1910, we mailed 250 return postal cards to all of the shippers in Trenton, 
including manufacturers, wholesale and retail merchants, which read as follows: 

"Dear Sir: In order to ascertain the true existing conditions pertaining to the 
disuse of the Delaware & Raritan Canal and the causes thereof, we are submitting 
for your approval the list of questions on attached card, which we trust you will answer 
and return not later than March 15, 1910." 

The questions on the return postal card were as follows: 

1. Do you ship by the Delaware & Raritan Canal? 

2. If not, why not? 

3. Would you ship by this canal with a lower rate? 

4. Would it be as convenient for you to ship by water as by rail? 

5. Has there been any discrimination in rates to your knowledge? 

The number of cards returned was 100. To the first question 70 replied in the 
affirmative and 30 in the negative. 

In answer to question No. 2, "If not, why not?" 7 replied because the rates were 
too high; 20 replied that it was not convenient to ship by canal; 3 replied that on 
account of poor service, which could not be depended upon, they could secure quicker 
delivery of merchandise by rail; 1 merchant replied because it was 50 years behind 
the times; 1 manufacturer claimed that the transfer charges were prohibitive; another 
manufacturer stated that they did not use the canal because they could not make 
connections in New York with railroad; 3 potteries suggested that the freight should be 
received near Mulberry Street, as formerly, so that all East Trenton firms could then 
use the canal to advantage. 

To question No. 3, "Would you ship by this canal with a lower rate?" 80 replied in 
the affirmative, 15 replied in the negative, 3 replied that with proper connections at 
New York end they would use the canal; 1 manufacturer replied "Yes, if transfer to 



240 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



other lines at either end could be made advantageous;" 3 manufacturers replied, 
"Yes, if there was a dock at East Trenton." 

To question No. 4, "Would it be as convenient for you to ship by water as by rail?" 
75 replied that it would; 25 replied that it would not be. 

To the last question, "Has there been any discrimination in rates to your knowl- 
edge?" 97 replied that there had not been to their knowledge; 1 manufacturer replied, 
"No definite information; " 2 merchants raised the question; 1 manufacturer answered, 
"Yes." 

Another example which proves the necessity of some relief from the present con- 
gestion of freight on the railroad is submitted: 

A postal-card canvass conducted by the Trenton Chamber of Commerce some years 
ago shows delays in shipments. These postal cards are submitted in their original 
form, of which there are about 800, and fully testifies to the inadequacy of transpor- 
tation at the present day. 

Conditions since this canvass was conducted have not changed, and the clipping 
from the Trenton Evening Times of December 29, 1910, which is attached hereto, 
describes very emphatically present conditions. 

During the month of September we received a communication from Col. William M. 
Black, senior member of the Board of Army Engineers, in charge of the survey for the 
intracoastal waterway. 

Recently we also received a communication from the committee on traffic of the 
proposed intracoastal canal, of which you are the secretary, for the direct purpose 
of gathering necessary data and statistics to show and impress upon Congress the 
necessity of this project. 

Owing to the position that the city of Trenton and vicinity occupy and the distance 
from the proposed canal, at first it seemed a difficult problem just how to reply to 
these communications and to show the benefits that could be derived from this 
development. After an interview with Col. W. M. Black on this perplexing problem 
we have learned that the benefits of the city of Trenton will come through additional 
links that have already been considered by the engineer in charge, and it will be 
permissible for ua, in estimating the benefits to be derived, to take into consideration 
that a spur from the main canal should be considered coming into East Trenton with 
the establishment of an artificial basin of sufficient size to accommodate the com- 
merce. We can also estimate our advantages with the development of the Delaware 
River from the outlet of this canal at Bordentown to the Pennsylvania Railroad bridge 
at Trenton. 

The surveys, favorable reports, and action have already been taken up by Con- 
gress in the appropriation of $260,000, up to date, for the improvement of this link to 
a depth of 12 feet. We can further anticipate that as this proposed canal will carry 
a depth of at least 18 feet of water, and with only 4^ miles from the proposed municipal 
docks at Trenton, it is probable and quite possible that with this development the 
front of the city of Trenton will carry at least the same depth of water, 18 feet, as the 
proposed canal. 

It will also be permissible, the route having already been surveyed and found 
practical, to develop the Delaware & Raritan Canal to the same depth with tidewater 
to a point where the main line of the Pennsylvania Railroad crosses under it. An- 
other fact that is practical and possible and has been taken into consideration for the 
future growth and better regulation of the traffic in the city of Trenton is that it is 
possible to abandon the Delaware & Raritan Canal from a point where the main line 
of the Pennsylvania Railroad crosses under it to a point where the proposed basin 
from the first link of the main canal has been suggested. With this portion of the 
Delaware & Raritan Canal eliminated you can readily see the great benefits and 
improvements that would come to Trenton, as it is generally conceded that the traffic 
on the streets in Trenton, by railroad crossings and canal bridges, is delayed at least 
an hour or more every day. With this change, these obstacles can all be overcome by 
the depression of railroad tracks and elimination of drawbridges through the heart 
of the city; and, with the abandonment of the feeder, grade crossings and draw- 
bridges running westerly would also be overcome, and the question of additional 
railroad freight terminals so much desired would be solved. These facts alone should 
carry sufficient weight to arouse enthusiasm sufficient to do all that might lie in our 
power to bring about these conditions for the future betterment of the city. 

We strongly advocate not only the construction of the New Jersey Ship Canal and 
the development of Spurs to reach into Trenton, but we believe that with this develop- 
ment and the carrying out of the entire intracoastal waterway scheme this canal 
will carry more commerce in one year than the Panama Canal will carry in 10 years. 
The time of boats plying between New York and Philadelphia will be reduced by 
hours. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 241 



We have made repeated efforts in trying to assist the committee in getting the 
manufacturers and shippers of Trenton and vicinity to cooperate in furnishing data, 
tonnage, and other necessary information that is essential to show the need of this 
development. But, we have only met with partial success in bringing out this data 
owing to the fact that the average manufacturer is so overburdened with details per- 
taining to his own business and the many applications of a similar nature being pre- 
sented to them from various sources from time to time, and the magnitude of the 
questions that have been put to them, that in their busy hours it looms up like a 
great undertaking, and their general complaint is that for want of time and more general 
knowledge on the questions, they fail to respond. 

In many cases we find where manufacturers are located along railroad sidings there 
is an impression that they would be antagonizing the railroads in uncovering any of 
their business. The excuse in this community that is often made by large manu- 
facturers closely identified with railroad interests is that the fact that the railroad 
gives them such modern service by bringing carloads right into their factories that 
they see no particular advantage in the development of the waterways; but, as a 
matter of fact, in the city of Trenton, we believe the statement would be conservative 
to say that eliminating the coal tonnage, which is qutoted at approximately 400,000 
tons annually by one of our largest coal dealers, fully 50 per cent of the total tonnage 
of Trenton is hauled away from railroad and boat terminals by horses and wagons. To 
further verify this statement I have in my possession a letter from one of the largest 
express men in Trenton, who says that after careful investigation of same he finds 
there are about 950 teams employed for the hauling of freight to and from all the 
terminals in this city. 

With this perfect development of the inland waterways and artificial cuts through- 
out the entire United States the benefits that are bound to come to this community 
could hardly be estimated. The city of Trenton consumes about 50,000,000 feet of 
lumber annually which is shipped here by rail, principally from the South, and the 
railroad rate from Norfolk to Trenton is $4.50 per thousand feet. It is estimated that 
with improved water facilities lumber could be brought from Norfolk to Trenton by 
barges at a rate of $1.85 per thousand feet, which would produce annually a saving on 
a million feet of lumber of over $106,000. 

The question of rate on coal to the city of Trenton is rather a serious one. and there 
is no doubt in our minds that with the development of these waterways, it will be 
reasonably fair to assume that the present rate will be considerably reduced. The 
present average rate on anthracite coal to Trenton is $1.75. This rate would be lowered 
to the extent that Trenton would then secure a rate more in proportion with Perth 
Amboy, 57 miles farther away from the mines, which is $1.80, and New Brunswick, 
27 miles farther away from the mines than Trenton, of $1 .80. And, with these con- 
ditions established, the saving to the coal consumers of the city of Trenton should be 
at least $200,000 annually. The same discrimination exists on a great many other 
products that are used extensively in this manucfaturing community; and, without 
going further into the details we believe that with these additional transportation 
facilities the savings to the city of Trenton would approximate over a million dollars 
annually. 

There is no doubt whatsoever but that the rate on soft coal from the South would be 
considerably less than it is at present. 

In 1909 the Legislature of the State of New Jersey passed an act conferring upon 
minicipalities the authority to organize harbor boards, issue bonds and to acquire 
water front property by purchase or condemnation for the erection of docks and other 
facilities. A copy of this act is as follows: 

[Senate No. 126. State of New Jersey. Introduced Feb. 15, 1909, by Senator Harry D. Leavitt. Referred 

to committee on commerce and navigation.] 

AN ACT Authorizing the creation of harbor boards in cities accessible to commerce by water and pre- 
scribing their powers and duties. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey: 

1. In any city of this State accessible to commerce by water there may be created 
a board to be known as "The harbor board of Trenton" (naming the city), by the 
adoption of a resolution by the board or body having charge of the finances of any 
such city. Such board shall be appointed by the board or body having charge of the 
finances in any such city. 

2. Such board shall consist of four reputable citizens of such city, of undoubted 
character, who shall be chosen with a view to business skill and efficiency. No more 
than two members of said board shall belong to the same political party. The members 
of the first board so as aforesaid appointed shall hold office one for a term of one year, 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 16 



242 IN TR AC AST AL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



one for a term of two years, and one for a term of three years, and one for a term of four 
years, and the members thereafter appointed shall hold office for a term of five years 
and until their successors are appointed, as aforesaid, and qualified. Members of such 
boards shall qualify by taking such oath as shall be required by the municipal charter 
for other municipal officers, or if no oath is required by charter, then by taking an 
oath faithfully and impartially to perform the duties of their office. 

3. The board shall have power to elect a president, to employ a secretary, who shall 
not be a member of the board, and such other officers or employees as may be necessary, 
as well as a marine engineer and a harbormaster, eaeh of whom shall perform such 
duties as may be assigned by the board under the direction of the board, and the 
board shall, subject to appropriation for that purpose from the funds of said city, fix 
their respective salaries. 

4. The board shall have power to make rules and regulations for its own government 
and for the regulation of the use of the harbor or river front of the said city by commerce, 
and the use of the public docks, wharves, piers, and warehouses of the said municipal- 
ity, and to enforce the same; to obtain and make leases of docks, wharves, piers, and 
warehouses, and receive the rents and income thereform, and pay the same over to the 
proper fiscal officer of such municipality, out of which said board may expend such 
sum for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of this act as the board or body 
having charge of the finances in such municipality shall appropriate; to make plans 
for the improvement of the harbor or river front of the said city, the construction of 
docks, wharves, piers, warehouses, sea walls, retaining walls, bulkheads, and the like, 
and for the deepening, clearing, widening, and protection of the harbor or river front 
and the maintenance thereof; to buoy and light such harbor or river front free from 
obstructions dangerous to navigation, and to do any similar act advantageous to the 
safe and profitable use of the said harbor or river front by commerce, and the devel- 
opment of the water commerce of the said municipality. 

5. The said board shall have power to purchase, or otherwise acquire, or to condemn 
in the name of the said city, according to an act of the legislature entitled "An act to 
regulate the ascertainment and payment of compensation for property condemned, or 
taken for public use" (revision), approved March 20, 1900, and the amendments 
thereof and supplements thereto, any lands on the water front or the said harbor or 
river necessary for the improvement of the said harbor or river front, the construction 
of docks, wharves, piers, warehouses, sea walls, bulkheads, driveways, and the like, 
as well as riparian lands, when authorized so to do by the board or body having charge 
of the finances of said city, subject to appropriation of municipal funds for such pur- 
pose, and to improve the same. 

6. No contract for any improvement or construction shall be entered into or work 
begun thereon until plans and specifications therefor shall have been prepared and 
approved by the board and submitted to and approved by the board or body having 
charge of the finances of said city, and bids invited and received thereon after adver- 
tisement in two or more newspapers of general circulation for a period of 10 days, nor 
until appropriation for the whole or part thereof shall have been made therefor. 

7. The board or body having charge of the finances of any city creating such a har- 
bor board shall have power to raise funds for the purpose specified in this act by the 
issue of bonds or otherwise, subject to the laws of this State governing the amount of 
bonded indebtedness of such municipalities. 

8. No member of the said board, nor any person appointed to office under this act, 
shall be financially interested in any contract, bargain, sale, or agreement made by or 
on behalf of the said board, nor in any matter or thing connected therewith, and any 
contract, bargain, sale, or agreement made in violation hereof shall be void as to the 
said board and the municipality represented by the said board. 

9. The board shall meet at least once in each month and as often in addition thereto 
as may be necessary. Three members of such board shall constitute a quorum for the 
transaction of any business properly coming before said board; provided, however, 
that notice, in writing, of any matter to be acted upon at any special meeting of said 
board shall be set forth in the notice of said special meeting, and no other matter 
except such as is specified in the said notice shall be considered by said board at any 
such special meeting. 

10. The board shall, as often as requested, report to the council or other board or 
body having charge of the finances its proceedings, any work that may be under way, 
and its progress, the general condition of the harbor front, and any other matters 
pertinent to the work and purposes of the said board and the development of the com- 
merce by water of the said municipality. 

11. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed and this 
act shall take effect immediately. 



I N TEA C OAS TAL WATEBWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEATJFOBT, N. C. 243 



An amendment to this act was passed giving cities the power to place streets adjacent 
to water fronts under the control of harbor boards for the purpose of seeking coopera- 
tion with the city of boats, steam railroad and electric railway companies and to place 
terminal facilities under the absolute control of the municipality. Trenton took 
advantage of the first act by the appointment by the city council of a harbor board. 
This board, immediately upon organizing, employed an expert engineer, Mr. Joseph F. 
Hasskarl, of Philadelphia, Pa., to prepare comprehensive plans for water front im- 
provements for the city of Trenton. These plans were adopted by the harbor board 
and copies sent to the United States War Department for its approval. 

On February 15, 1910, city council of Trenton authorized the harbor board to acquire 
by purchase or condemnation the river front for harbor improvements. On January 
21 of the same year council passed an ordinance providing for an immediate bond 
issue of $50,000 and $50,000 more to be given when required for the purchase of our 
entire water front at tidewater. 

Trenton does not intend to improve all her water front at the same time. Our policy 
is to improve the water front from time to time as increased commerce shall demand. 
The financial policy covering this work is that to meet a total cost of about $1,000,000 
the city shall appropriate $100,000 annually for 10 years — the period in which the 
entire improvement can be easily completed under the plans already adopted by the 
harbor board. 

We herewith submit a complete set of blue prints showing the proposed improve- 
ments to the water front of Trenton as well as a report and estimate of the cost as fur- 
nished by the engineer. 

RESOLUTION. 

Resolved, that the harbor board of the city of Trenton be and it is hereby authorized 
to purchase, or otherwise acquire, or condemn in the name of the city of Trenton, 
in conformity with an act of the legislature of this State entitled, "An act to regulate 
the ascertainment and payment of compensation for property condemned or taken 
for public use" (revision of 1900), approved March 20, 1900, and the amendments 
and supplements thereto, and the lands included in the schedule annexed to this 
resolution, or such part thereof, as such board may in its discretion deem necessary 
for the improvement of the harbor of River Front, the construction of docks, wharves, 
piers, warehouses, sea walls, bulkheads, driveways, and the like, as well as riparian 
lands; and for so doing the passage of this resolution shall be their sufficient warrant. 

I hereby certify that this is a true copy. Adopted, Trenton, N. J. 

0. A. Remsen, 

Assistant City Clerk. 

Adopted February 15, 1910. 

Harry B. Salter, 

City Clerk. 

Mr. Wilfred H. Schopp, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 



Philadelphia, Pa., February 7, 1910. 

Gentlemen: I have the honor to submit herewith a plan, showing a bulkhead 
and pierhead line in the Delaware River, in front of the city of Trenton; also a number 
of piers and general plan of harbor improvements. 

Owing to the limited time for the preparation of this plan, and the extraordinary 
severity of the winter, a more thorough examination and survey of the locality could 
not be made; consequently, the plans are not as elaborate and complete as I intended, 
and as otherwise would have been the case. 

I am fully aware that the present conditions and needs of the city of Trenton do 
not make it necessary to enter immediately into improvements on such a large scale 
as I have shown and suggested; but my idea is to prepare and have adopted by the 
city of Trenton a comprehensive plan , providing for present requirements and future 
expansion and development of the city of Trenton. My thought is, for the present, 
that the city should simply acquire the land as rapildy as means will permit, in order 
to get control of the water front, and then build piers and bulkheads as required. 
The acquirement of the land at this time is of the greatest importance. 

I have given careful consideration to the proposed bulkhead and pierhead line, 
and believe that, if you should request the Secretary of War to establish a pierhead 
and bulkhead line at Trenton, and submit the plan I have prepared showing such 
lines, and request to have them adopted, your application would receive most favor- 
able consideration. 



244 INTBACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOET, N. C. 



In connection with the pierhead and bulkhead line as fixed by me on the chart 
I would suggest that, when you present this matter to the War Department, you invite 
attention to the cross sections (five in number) that I have shown and computed 
in different parts of the river, in which I show present conditions, and that they will 
be after the proposed improvements are made. Those cross sections show conclusively 
that the line as fixed by me will not in any possible way injure the river and provides 
for a free run off of freshets. 

It is thought that by the time the proposed improvements are found too small or 
inadequate the city will have the means and find it advantageous to extend the system 
of harbor improvements to the section of the city below the cemeteiy, and I would 
urgently recommend that the purchase of such lands be made at an early date, while 
they can be bought at comparatively low figures. 

From my understanding of the present financial condition of the city of Trenton, 
and the money available for the use of the harbor board at this time, it appears to me 
that the herewith submitted plans, data, and report are all that you require at the 
present time, or will require until after you have purchased lands, and more money 
is appropriated for the actual improvement of your harbor. 

The plans I have prepared are as follows: 

Piers No. 1 and No. 2. — For river commerce and passenger service. Length, 450 
feet; width, 100 feet. With sheds and single railroad track, designed to carry a weight 
of 450 pounds per square foot of deck space. Estimated cost of each pier, $104,300. 

Pier No. 3. — For coastwise traffic. Length, 650 feet; width, 100 feet. With shed 
and single railroad track, designed to carry a weight of 450 pounds per square foot of 
deck space. Estimated cost, $149,330. 

Pier No. 4. — For coastwise and trans-Atlantic trade. Length, 555 feet; width, 150 
feet. Double-deck, two railroad tracks, designed to carry 450 pounds per square foot 
on the first or lower deck and 350 pounds per square foot on the second deck. Esti- 
mated cost, $269,003. 

Pier No. 5. — For low-grade freights, iron ore, coal, sand, gravel, etc. Length, 
465 feet; width, 100 feet. Open single-deck pier, paved with Belgian block, single 
railroad track, designed to carry 500 pounds per square foot of deck space. Estimated 
cost, $71,854. 

Pier No. 6. — For low-grade freights, iron ore, coal, sand, gravel, etc. Length, 
370 feet; width, 100 feet. Open single-deck pier, paved with Belgian block, single 
railroad track, designed to carry 500 pounds per square foot of deck space. Esti- 
mated cost, $57,616. 

The dock spaces between piers are in no case less than 150 feet. 

The plan shows an extensive line of bulkhead. Of course, this will not be necessary 
until commerce or other improvements demand it. The plans of the bulkhead show 
recess landings every 500 feet, which, I think, will prove a great convenience for 
landing small boats, launches, etc. The approximate cost per hundred feet of an 
average section of bulkhead is $6,794. 

These plans have been examined by a number of experts in the line of harbor 
improvements and have been pronounced good and adequate, as they provide for 
all your present needs and future requirements. 

In the preparation of the plans herewith submitted I took into consideration the 
present and future size and conditions of Trenton, the improvements in the Delaware 
River, which are now contemplated and will surely be made between Philadelphia 
and Trenton, also the local conditions along the shores and in the river, in the vicinity 
of Trenton, and was guided by a desire to take full advantage of all natural conditions. 

Trusting the information will be of service to you, I have the honor to be 
Very respectfully, yours, 

Joseph F. Hasskarl. 

Mr. Frederick W. Donnelly, president, and members of the Harbor Board of City 
of Trenton, Trenton, N.J. 



Inclosed are the following: 

Sheet No. 1. — Showing survey made of Delaware River in the vicinity of Trenton, 
the latter part of 1909. 

Sheet No. 2. — Showing soundings in the Delaware River, contours, cross sections, 
and proposed improvements. 

Sheet No. 3. — Showing proposed improvements. 

Sheet No. 4. — Showing plans of all the piers and the bulkhead. 

On Tuesday, September 27, 1910, a conference was called at the statehouse, under 
the auspices of the Philadelphia-Trenton-New York Deeper Waterway Association, 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 245 



the purpose of which was to formulate some plan of action by which the cooperation 
of the various interests in New Jersey could be secured to promote the New Jersey 
Ship Canal. At this conference the various commercial organizations and business 
interests of the State of New Jersey were represented, and Col. Black, of the United 
States Engineers Office, having under its supervision the proposed project, was 
present and described the character of the proposed canal and the approximate cost 
of several types of canals, and gave other interesting data pertaining to the same. 

The following resolutions were offered and unanimously adopted : 

"Resolved, That the governor of this State be requested to appoint a committee of 
5 to cooperate on behalf of this State with the committee of 50 in connection with 
the New Jersey Ship Canal and the development of the inland waterways. 

"Resolved, That the governor and the legislature of this State be requested to pass 
an act for the appointment of a commission with proper powers to secure rights of way 
across the State of New Jersey for ship canal, with a view to deeding the same to the 
National Government. Resolved, further, that the governor and legislature of this 
State be requested to favor an appropriation for this purpose." 

At the request of the Philadelphia-Trenton-New York Deeper Waterway Association, 
Governor Fort recently appointed a commission composed of David Baird, of Camden, 
N. J.; Peter Campbell, Newark, N. J.; Samuel Heilner, Spring Lake, N. J.; Ben- 
jamin F. S. Brown, Natawan, N. J.; and Frederick W. Donnelly, of Trenton, N. J. 
The commission met for organization at the statehouse on Thursday, January 12, 
and adopted the following resolutions: 

" Whereas, at a meeting of the Philadelphia-Trenton-New York Deeper Waterways 
Association, held at the statehouse, in the city of Trenton, it was resolved that the 
governor of this State be requested to appoint a committee of 5 to cooperate on behalf 
of this State with a committee of 50 of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association to 
consider and report upon matters in connection with a proposed cooperation between 
the State of New Jersey and the Federal Government, looking toward the construction 
of a ship canal across New Jersey and the development of the inland waterways of this 
and other coast States, in accordance with which resolution the governor did appoint 
Messrs. David Baird, Peter Campbell, Samuel Heilner, Benjamin F. S. Brown, and 
Frederick W. Donnelly as the members of such commission; and 

" Whereas, the said commission has met from time to time to discuss the matters sub- 
mitted in accordance with the said resolution, and has received such information as could 
be afforded by the Federal Government with reference to the survey made by the 
engineers of the United States Army in such detail as the same is now perfected; and 

" Whereas, it is apparent that in order to bring about the undertaking of this impor- 
tant work by the Federal Government cooperation by the State of New Jersey is neces- 
sary and proper, since such cooperation on the part of the State is better to induce the 
Federal Government to undertake the construction of this canal; and 

" Whereas, It is believed by the commission above referred to, upon information 
received from the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army, under whose direction 
the said survey was made, that the right of way of the said canal, according to the 
survey made, will require about 4,000 acres of land, the cost of which, including 
damage claims for water rights extinguished, is estimated to be about $500,000, and 

" Whereas, It is believed that the benefits which will accrue to the State of New 
Jersey by reason of the construction of the proposed canal are a sufficient warrant 
for the cooperation of the State with the Federal Government in the construction of 
the said canal: 

"Be it resolved by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey: 
"1. That the construction of a canal across the State of New Jersey, connecting 
New York Bay with deep water in the Delaware River at Bordentown, N. J., by 
the Federal Government, is an enterprise which is likely to result in great benefit 
to this State and its inhabitants, in encouraging the various industries of the State, 
and affording a more ready method of communication and transportation between 
points within this State and other points in this country and abroad, particularly in 
view of the importance of this canal as a necessary link in the intracoastal system of 
inland waterways extending from Maine to Florida, which, when completed, will be 
of inestimable benefit to transportation along the entire Atlantic seaboard. 

"2. That in order to bring about the construction of this canal and its completion 
within as short a time as possible, on behalf of the people of this State it is hereby 
declared that when the Government of the United States shall finally settle upon 
the route of the said canal and shall make provision for its construction by suitable 
appropriation, the State of New Jersey shall acquire the right of way for the said 
canal by purchase or condemnation from the owners thereof and cede the same to 
the Federal Government for the uses of the Government in constructing and main- 
taining the said canal, upon condition that the said canal, when completed, shall 



246 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



be free and open to the commerce of the world, without tolls or charges for the passage 
of vessels or freight thereon; provided the said right of way can be obtained by pur- 
chase or condemnation for a sum not exceeding $500,000, or such sum as may be 
appropriated by the legislature for that purpose at the time when such appropriation 
and other legislation necessary to carry into effect the purposes of this resolution, shall 
become necessary and appropriate. 

"3. That a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded by the secretary of the 
senate to the honorable the Secretary of War. 

"4. This joint resolution shall take effect immediately." 

It has been suggested and favorably commented upon by the press of the State 
that in addition to providing the right of way for the ship canal, that the State acquire 
from 500 to 1,000 feet on each side of the canal for the purpose of terminals, manu- 
facturing sites and railroad connections to be leased under State control, and the 
income from the same to be dedicated to the road fund of the State. 

It has further been suggested in connection with this development that the State, 
during the process of the construction of this canal, construct an automobile highway 
following the line of the canal from the Raritan Bay to the Delaware River. 

New Jersey's proposed assistance in the development of a ship canal and Trenton's 
plan of municipal control of its water front and streets adjacent thereto, are solutions 
of the water transportation problem that have been set up; and these solutions lead 
logically to the perfect plan of cooperation of the railways and waterways. 

New Jersey and Trenton propose to dovetail the waterways and railways. We are 
going even further; we propose to include in our development the other highways; 
and this dovetailing will come about either by common consent of all parties at 
interest or by force of law. The modern railroad man now sees the wisdom of this 
policy, and their cooperation, I believe, is already assured. 

It is the consensus of opinion among those who have given study to the project 
that the construction of such an intracoastal canal across the State of New Jersey 
holds out advantages immeasurably superior to the amount of money required for 
its construction, and it is the earnest hope of all, that the project can be so presented 
to Congress as to bring about the making of an appropriation sufficient for the carry- 
ing out of the project. 

Respectfully submitted. 

C. Arthur Metzger, 
Secretary of Trenton Chamber of Commerce. 
Fred'k W. Donnelly, 
President Philadelphia- Trenton-New York Deeper Waterway Association. 



[Appendix C 9.] 

The Board op Trade of the City of Newark, N. J., 

January 6, 1911. 

Dear Sir: With reference to proposed intracoastal canal project and information 
requested in yours under date of October 25, 1910, we beg to submit: 

1. The manufacturing interests in the city of Newark have felt the great necessity 
of municipal dock facilities. The wharf owned by the city has a frontage of about 
200 feet, as poorly located as possible and seldom available. 

The city, however, under a referendum vote has authorized a bond issue of $1,000,000 
to be used in acquiring all of the available frontage on Newark Bay to be developed 
under municipal direction for water and terminal purposes, in connection with water- 
way improvements contemplated on the meadow lands adjacent thereto, which work 
is being urged by the mayor, and options on lands are being secured. 

2. It is the purpose of the city to have the system of wharves and terminals con- 
nected with the foliowing railway lines: The Pennsylvania, the New Jersey Central, 
and the Lehigh Valley. 

3. All of the available frontage on the Passaic River is occupied by private corpo- 
rations. A privilege to manufacturers or others who wish to unload a cargo at various 
times is granted. 

6. As to the area and population receiving benefits of water transportation, this 
would include the entire city of Newark, the West Hudson towns, Belleville, and 
points adjacent thereto, an area of about 40 square miles, having a population of about 
500,000. 

7. Freight rates by rail are as follows, in cents, per class per hundredweight 
between Philadelphia and New York: 

L L 1 1 5 6 
22 18 15 12 10| 9£ 



INTRACOASTAL WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 247 



Between Philadelphia and Newark, the same as above. 

9. In and about this city there are not less than 16 freight terminal stations, placing 
such facilities within a mile of almost any point, according to the railroad on which 
delivery is to be made. 

There are five central terminals within a mile of the heart of the city. 

10. Cost of haul would be about equal from river points to that from railway terminal 
points. 

12. Total freight delivered in Newark by rail, 3,670,738 tons. 
Shipped from Newark, 1,047,489 tons. 

Tonnage received and shipped by water, 2,778,062 tons. 
Estimated value of river freight, $137,745,000. 

Number of trips made annually by vessels to and from Newark, 36,560. 

13. The volume of bulk freight delivered by water consists of lumber, brick, paving 
materials, ores, fertilizer materials, .and gypsum rock. 

A larger percentage of lumber is now coming in by rail to that of former years, owing 
to the point of origin not being located at points where water deliveries can be made 
without rehandling. Owing to the practical abandonment of the Morris Canal, which 
is now operated by the Lehigh Valley Railroad Co as lessees, the greater volume of 
the tonnage of coal consumed in this city and vicinity is now delivered by rail, with 
a consequent additional cost. 

Further, with reference to the benefits which would follow the construction of such 
a canal as proposed to connect New York Bay and the Delaware Bay at Philadelphia, 
and consequent upon the extension of such an inland water route to connect the 
Delaware and Chesapeake, there should be an immediate reduction in delivery 
charges, owing to the risk of hazard to vessel and property being largely removed. 

The terminal facilities in and about Raritan Bay, Arthur Kill, and Newark Bay 
are subject to a splendid development both for water and railway terminals, and this 
development should lend itself to effecting a great saving in the annual fixed charges 
now paid for lighterage service in and about New York Harbor and a quicker delivery 
of freights by affording larger facilities at termini, if the advantages were available 
for vessels engaged in the ocean-carrying trade and railway terminals adjusted 
therewith. 

An inland route such as proposed would take practically all of the coastwise trade 
originating at extreme points and would undoubtedly stimulate the building up of 
communities along the entire route, particularly that part of it within the State of 
New Jersey. 

It would not only encourage larger development of farm properties by affording 
facilities for the transportation of produce to the great centers of population and to 
points along the route, but it would undoubtedly bring about what is known as 
intensified farming and market gardening, as the section through which it is proposed 
this canal should run is subject to such development, the land being perhaps the 
most fertile of any in this State. 

It would build up new industries along the route and would serve to expand the 
manufacture of tile products from clay, and establishment of glass plants, and the 
shipment of sand in vast quantities for construction uses. 

It would also be made use of, undoubtedly, in connection with the great tonnage 
which will come from the Lake districts through the barge canal via the Hudson 
for direct transport to Philadelphia for transshipment. 

It is the consensus of opinion among those who have given study to the project 
that the construction of such an intracoastal canal across the State of New Jersey 
to connect the Hudson with the Delaware holds out advantages immeasurably supe- 
rior to the amount of money required for its construction; and it is the earnest hope 
of all that the project can be so presented to Congress as to bring about the making 
of an appropriation sufficient for the carrying out of the project. 

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Board of Trade of the City of Newark. 

George F. Reeve, 

President. 

Jas. M. Reilly 

Secretary. 

Col. W. M. Black, 

Corps of Engineers. 



[Appendix D 1.] 

Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co., 

Philadelphia, June 14, 1910. 

Dear Sir: In response to your letter of the 13th instant, making inquiry in regard 
statement of cost of the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal in our exhibit, marked "A." 



248 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



dated August 31, 1906, I would say that, so far as we have been able to ascertain, 
the amount, $3,989,365.17, represents the coat of the canal to May 31, 1887. Since 
that date no renewals or betterments made have been added to that account. 
Very respectfully, 

C. L. Nicholson, President. 

Maj. R. R. Raymond, 

Corps of Engineers. 



[Appendix D 2.] 

Chesapeake & Delaware Canal Co., 

Philadelphia, July 12, 1910. 

Dear Sir: We are in receipt of your letter of the 11th instant, requesting that 
your board of officers, appointed under the provisions of the river and harbor act of 
March 3, 1909, to survey an intracoastal waterway between Boston, Mass., and 
Beaufort, N. C, be furnished with a price at which our company will sell to the 
United States our property known as The Chesapeake & Delaware Canal, together 
with its franchises, etc., as it exists to-day. 

It is not practicable for us to carry out your suggestion; there are approximately 
900 stock and loan holders of the company, to perhaps most of whom such a propo- 
sition, to bring a definite response, would have to be accompanied with some price 
that might probably be obtained for their securities if negotiations pending eventu- 
ated in an agreement of sale. 

In the report of the commission appointed to examine and report upon a route 
for an open waterway to connect the Chesapeake and Delaware Bays, Senate docu- 
ment No. 215, Fifty-ninth Congress, is given an itemized statement of the canal 
company's estimated value of the physical canal and its appurtenances at that date, 
amounting to $5,348,071, which may, perhaps, in some measure meet your require- 
ments. 

Very respectfully, C. L. Nicholson, President. 

Maj. R. R. Raymond, 

Corps of Engineers. 



[Appendix D 3.] 

Baltimore & Philadelphia Steamboat Co., 
Philadelphia, January 31, 1911. 

Dear Sir: In reply to yours of the 26th instant I herewith return the report which 
I have filled up as covering our business through the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal. 
As to the amount of tonnage that would use this canal if enlarged, in my judgment it 
would be very great in both directions. All east-bound vessels would use the canal 
or inside route to save the sea risks via Cape Henry. A great deal of trade would use 
the canal via Cape May to and from the East, which would save them from the long 
haul and sea risk. The present canal is in a deplorable condition as well as unreliable 
in operation. The rates charged for toll are prohibitory, restrict trade and prevent 
competition. 

Yours truly, ' F. S. Groves, Agent. 

Maj. R. R. Raymond, 

Corps of Engineers. 



River & Harbor Improvement Co., 

Philadelphia, January 31, 1911. 

Dear Mr. Miller: Inclosed please find a list of our plants which would use the 
Delaware & Chesapeake Canal if enlarged to a 35-foot width. I trust the same is in 
the form you wish. The annual saving such a canal would be to us is hard to estimate 
as it would permit us taking our plant to points inaccessible at present except by tak- 
ing the risk of an outside tow. 

The saving might perhaps be estimated at from $5,000 to $10,000 per year. 
Yours truly, 

River & Harbor Improvement Co., 

James D. Faires, Superintendent. 

Mr. Geo. W. T. Miller, 

Assistant Engineer. 



INTBACOASTAL WATEBWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 249 



J. B. Blades Lumber Co., 
Newbern, N. C, March 9, 1911. 

Dear Sir: Your letter of March 7 is at hand, with circulars inclosed. I also received 
the first circular you sent, but was called away from home and did not get to look 
after it; in fact, the questions asked are a little difficult to answer. 

The cut from the Delaware Bay to the Chesapeake Bay, about where the old canal 
is, is a most important one; yet, until the cut is made from Norfolk to our sound, I can 
not see that this would so greatly benefit us. 

We are shipping from the various mills here that we are interested in, from fifteen 
to twenty million feet of lumber per year. Nine-tenths of this goes through the Dela- 
ware & Chesapeake Canal. The rate on this lumber to Philadelphia from our mills 
is $2.75 per thousand, and by rail it is about $5.25, so you see that the present water 
facilities with the saving to us is very great. Now if the waterways were made sea- 
level canals, free of tolls, we would not only save the amount of the toll, which is about 
$45,000, but we would be able to ship in larger barges, and by this means saving at 
least 50 cents per thousand, or $75,000. This does not take into count the mills that 
we are interested in at Elizabeth City, with an output of about 12,000,000 feet of lum- 
ber per year, which is all shipped almost wholly by rail, but with the improved and 
free waterways would move largely by water, and the amount of business done by us 
is only a small part of the whole amount. 

We can not afford to use the part of the canal that is now completed to Beaufort, 
because this puts us in the ocean south of Cape Hatteras, a very dangerous coast, 
besides our lumber carriers are made for inland waters and would not stand the waves 
of the ocean. This makes a wonderful saving in transportation, because the barges 
being built for inside traffic do not need to be built too expensively to stand the work, 
and it is safe to use them almost twice as long as if they were trading in the ocean. 

We do not receive any goods worth taking any account of, as we buy through the 
regular dealers the supplies we need. I am intensely interested in the success of this 
project and will be glad to do anything I can to give you information with regard to 
it. I am filling in one of these blanks to correspond with what I have said in the let- 
ter. If you need something more accurate and more in detail, please advise me, and 
we will try to give it to you. 

The barges by which we make lumber shipments usually return to us loaded with 
coal, fertilizer, and merchandise. The merchandise shipments, with free water rate, 
would be greatly enlarged and I believe a regular steamer line would be established. 
Yours, very respectfully, 

J. B. Blades, President. 

Mr. George W. T. Miller, 

Assistant Engineer. 



|Appendix E 1.] 

Stenographic Report of Public Hearing held at Norfolk, Va., September 6, 

1910. 

Members of board present: Col. F. V. Abbot, Lieut. Col. J. C. Sanford, Lieut. Col. 
M. M. Patrick, Maj. R. R. Raymond, Corps of Engineers, United States Army. 

Col. Abbot. The meeting will come to order, please. Col. Black, the president 
of this board, has asked me to announce this morning that emergency orders have 
made it necessary for him to be in Habana, Cuba, this morning. 

He wants it understood that he will go over all the papers submitted, will read over 
the stenographic report of these proceedings, and in that way will be able to give to 
the facts brought out at this meeting the necessary consideration in forming his deci- 
sion as to which route will be selected. 

I am informed that a large delegation is expected here about 11 o'clock. I regard 
it as very important to bring out to-day all possible facts bearing upon the question 
at issue. To do that properly, I think it is necessary for the actual business of the 
meeting to await the arrival of this large delegation, so that they may have an oppor- 
tunity of hearing what is said, and thereby have the opportunity of replying thereto 
if there is anything which they wish to say. We shall, therefore, take a recess until 
11 o'clock, and if you all come back again at that^time I will be very much obliged. 

We wish to get all the facts possible to-day, so in forming our final judgment on the 
very important matters entrusted to us we may not err. Recess until 11 o'clock. 

(At the expiration of the recess the meeting was called to order by Col. Abbot, 
who read the act of Congress under which the present board is acting.) 



250 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Col. Abbot. We are here to-day to give this public hearing, and I ask any one 
who has facts to present to rise and present them, and then he will be followed by 
others representing the same side, and when that has been exhausted I will ask the 
persons representing the other side to present their cause. As you rise, please give 
your name to the stenographer. 

Mr. M. K. King (of Norfolk). I desire to file with you some photographs that will 
be referred to by the people who will address you. These are industries along the 
line of the Lake Drummond Canal. They are designed to show that the region is 
one of active production. These [referring to the photographs ! ] are farms; there is 
a farm of 3,200 acres under cultivation; there is another of 900 acres, there is another 
of 1,800 acres, and there is another of 2,500 acres. There is the shipping depot of the 
Roper Lumber Co., which produces the raw material and manufactures it in its mill 
at Gilmerton. [Mr. King here presented photographs 1 showing the development of 
the country in the vicinity of the canal.] Here is a publication 1 which gives some 
illustrations of the work done on the farm of 1,800 acres, which I spoke of, in the way 
of drainage and improvements. I desire to file that with the others. 

The statements I offer, and I shall file them, are intended to indicate the preference 
of traffic for the Lake Drummond Canal. 

For the eight months of 1910 the receipts of tolls on the Lake Drummond Canal 
have increased 47 per cent. 



Month. 



January. . 
February 
March. . . 

April 

May 



1909 



$6, 509 
6,408 
6,970 
5,167 
5,117 



1910 



$5, 284 
7,160 

10,329 
7,327 
8,097 



Month. 



June 

July 

August 

Total 



1909 



3,728 
3,261 
3,016 



40, 176 



1910 



6,127 
6,945 
7,904 



59, 173 



For the same period the number of vessels has increased 20.4 per cent and the regis- 
tered tonnage 35.5 per cent. 



Month. 


Number of vessels. 


Tonnage. 


1909 


1910 


1909 


1910 




414 
405 
485 

386 
402 
413 
363 
330 


406 
399 
531 
510 
525 
485 
549 
446 


41,453 
38, 298 
40, 979 
36, 473 
37,954 
29,827 
29,041 
24,342 


38,814 
45, 672 
36, 220 
50,315 
49, 307 
48, 726 
50, 287 
37,836 


February 














Total 


3,198 


3,851 


278,367 


377, 177 





I desire to ask the board's attention particularly to the following statement relative 
to the movement in the two routes. From March 12 (when the record began) to August 
31, inclusive, the movement of all vessels throughout the two waterways has been as 
follows, being an increase of 71 per cent and 63 per cent of total vessels in both routes: 



Steamboats 

Tugs 

Vessels (sailing) 

Barges 

Rafts 

Lighters 

Motor boats 

Total 



Currituck 
route. 


Lake 
Drum- 
mondroute. 


Increase. 


416 


698 


282 


481 


620 


139 


191 


409 


218 


103 


783 


680 


61 


53 


8 


96 


81 


15 


330 


228 


102 


1,678 


2,872 


1,194 



Examined and filed by the Board, but not printed. 



INTRAC OASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, 5T, C. 251 



The steamboats represent service chiefly local in each route; the tugs are mostly 
hired by the canal companies; and the motor boats, many of them, are service boats. 

None of these classes represents competitive traffic passing between Chesapeake Bay 
and North Carolina waters, which is carried in sailing vessels, barges, and lighters. 
Of those three classes the number passing through Lake Drummond Crnal was 883 
greater, and was 74.5 per cent of the aggregate of those classes by the two routes, and 
the tolls on vessels of 100 tons and over are 35 per cent greater in Lake Drummond 
Canal. 

It will occur to the board that the period is the one most favorable for traffic in the 
Currituck Sound route. The prevalent southerly winds caused maximum stages of 
water, and the dangers of coastal storm is least. The traffic, nevertheless, in large 
preponderance sought the route where it found protection, stable maximum depth 
for full ladings, and greater dispatch, at higher tolls but less cost. 

This fact is not to be explained away. The cause is natural and permanent; results 
may fluctuate at times under temporary influences; but under such supervision as 
that of your corps I do not hesitate to say that if both routes were free, the same or 
greater excess of traffic would continue to seek the western route. 

The following is a comparison of registered tonnage vessels of all classes: 





1909 


1910 


March 12-31 


28,208 
36,473 
37,954 
29, 827 
29,041 
24,352 


38,419 
50,315 
49,307 
48, 726 
50, 287 
38,056 


April 


May 




July 


August 


Total 


185,855 


275,090 
189,235 


Increase 







1 48 per cent. 



From April 1 to September 1 the average time of all vessels moving continuously 
through Lake Drummond Canal was 7 hours and 5 minutes, including both locks. 

We submit the testimony of 58 masters of steam and sail vessels and barges, giving 
the reasons of their preference for either route. The average years of service in the 
two routes is 13 years. (See Exhibit A attached hereto, p. 267). 

One board of your corps, in considering certain projects for this section, has said 
that the engineering advantages and disadvantages are so nearly balanced that the 
question of cost may be made the determining consideration. 

That is cramping this situation into deformity. The governing facts are of right 
and wrong, not of expediency. 

Is it conceivable that if the public, that is to pay for this waterway, understood that 
it was proposed to build it partly out of the farms, mills, shops, and other activities 
of the threatened district it would accept the sacrifice? Hardly. 

Again, the development of transportation in this country has been progressive. The 
day of small beginnings and low cost paved the way for the proportions of this day 
that would then have been prohibitive. This policy often mortgaged the revenue 
of posterity, and wisely. 

In this situation, however, it is proposed to reverse the system and burden the 
living for the benefit of those to come. 

The location and estimated cost of this section of the waterway are predicated upon 
future enlargements which this generation and the next may never ask for. 

If-the military need of the Government, or the changed and novel wants of a com- 
merce yet unborn, demand a larger waterway, don't make its cost a servitude upon 
the lands and people of a part of two States only. 

Is it prudent to close up any channel of transportation to commerce? Is it not the 
foundation of the waterways policy to expand and increase? A railroad is seldom 
or never abandoned. With some degree of efficiency it contributes its share of facili- 
ties to the development and maintenance of that common stock of activities that means 
prosperity. 

The Lake Drummond Canal was performing its mission before there were railroads; 
it has continued to do so for 30 years after a neighboring one was built, and its 
mission is not ended. 

Mr. W. B. Brooks, of Baltimore. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen: I appeared 
before this board in March, 1910, in New York City, on behalf of the Lake Drummond 
Canal & Water Co., known as the Dismal Swamp Canal, and at that time I made an 



252 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



offer in behalf of the company to sell the canal to the Government for the sum of 
$2,500,000, giving a depth of 12 feet of water and locks of suitable size at either end, 
said locks generally conforming to the report of the engineers submitted in Document 
84, Fifty-ninth Congress. 

Upon request of the board to name a price at which the company would be willing 
to turn over the property in its present condition, under date of March 21, I wrote a 
letter naming a million seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars. 

This board and former boards have reported in behalf of the Albemarle & Chesapeake 
Canal in preference to the Dismal Swamp Canal and I believe they have been guided 
simply from an engineering standpoint. 

What is the great value of a canal? It certainly is not the engineering quality, 
but is the use of the same by commerce. To-day I can safely say that 75 per cent of 
all commerce passing from the lower sounds of North Carolina goes through the Dismal 
Swamp Canal in preference to the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal. There must be 
some radical reason for this. When I say further that this same commerce is paying 
a higher rate per ton to the Dismal Swamp Canal, than is charged in the Albemarle 
& Chesapeake Canal, there must still be a further reason. That reason is not hard to 
find. It is because the Dismal Swamp Canal presents a more certain route, one that 
is not affected by tides or winds, in which the storm plays no part; consequently, 
it makes it the most safe and sure, and this point is the one which I wish to draw this 
board's particular attention to, and it remains for you to state which is the safest 
and best adapted for commerce, and which had the Government better provide for 
commerce? 

The Government, I take it, is carrying out this inland project for the use of its . 
people; therefore, if its people elect to follow a certain line because of its advantages, 
should this board turn that down because another line presents easier engineering 
problems? The question of a few dollars more or less on the cost, certainly ought not 
to control the action of this board. 

It is certain that whichever route is adopted and acquired by the Government 
means the utter ruin of the other route, and I can readily appreciate that this board 
is in an awkward position in this respect, and it certainly is not my desire to make 
your task harder. 

The reports by the engineers on this matter that I have seen base their figures on the 
10-foot project, and on the 12-foot project, and in arriving at their conclusions state 
the number of cubic yards of excavation that would be required to produce these 
depths, which, at an assumed price, would cost so many dollars, and in the comparison 
between the two routes would sum up their decision on these figures. 

If you will examine those figures, you will find that no provision has been made 
to maintain these depths except at ordinary tides, whereas the winds play an important 
part in condition of the tides in the Currituck Sound, and I think I am speaking 
within bounds when I say to maintain a 10-foot canal, under all conditions of tides 
would require at least a 15-foot cut, and if you wish a 12-foot channel it would require 
a 17-foot cut. This is not the case with the Dismal Swamp Canal, because the winds 
have no effect on the depth of the water; consequently, in making comparisons, 
certainly an excavation fund would be provided for more than the depth stated, 
and this should be added to the cost of producing the channel via Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal. 

Again, in making comparisons, the figures considered have been for entirely remov- 
ing the locks at either end of the Dismal Swamp Canal, and producing a sea-level 
canal. This is unnecessary for commerce, as is evidenced by the fact that commerce 
is using the locks without complaint. 

The very existence of these locks means a maintenance of a uniform depth and of 
a certain navigation that equals in continuity land travel. 

So satisfactory is this condition that I do not believe I am speaking out of bounds 
when I state that there is not one member of this bpard who would eliminate these 
locks, if they were under his control, if by so doing it would produce conditions that 
exist in our neighbor's canal during any storm period, nor do I believe that com- 
merce would countenance such removal, if it thought it would produce a condition 
that now exists in the Currituck Sound. 

To sum up, therefore, gentlemen, it means that if you are comparing these canals 
from an engineering standpoint only, if you will add the extra depth of excavation 
with the necessary extra width that would be required to maintain this depth, owing 
to the slope, to the price you have put on the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal, I am 
satisfied you will find the Government will expend more money than though they 
accepted this offer of the Dismal Swamp Canal. If, coupled with this, you will take 
the words of commerce as represented to you here to-day, the comparison certainly is 
strong in favor of the Dismal Swamp Canal. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, 1ST. C. 253 



Col. Abbott. Is there anyone else to speak on that subject? 

Mr. King. That is all the canal company will have. Will it be your pleasure to 
have the representation which comes up heard at this time? 
Col. Abbott. Yes. 

Mr. W. I. Halstead (South Mills, N. C). Gentlemen, considering your valuable 
time, I will be very brief. I represent the delegation that you see in front of you — 
not excursionists, but people who are here to defend and fight for that which they have 
toiled and labored for these many years. 

This delegation represents the interests of the 5,000 people who are property 
owners residing in South Mills Township, Camden County, and Newland Township, 
Pasquotank County, N. C, who are totally dependent upon the Lake Drummond 
Canal for transportation. 

These statistics which I wish to make known here are all in North Carolina and in 
these townships I have just stated. 

Now, the number of acres within the bounds of these two townships is practically 
100,000, of which about 33,000 are in cultivation, and many acres are being improved 
each year. From the principal shipping point at South Mills, N. C, there is snipped 
annually the following: Eight thousand barrels of potatoes; 100,000 bushels of corn; 
800 bales of cotton; 1,500 crates of green truck; poultry, eggs, cattle, and hogs to the 
amount of $100,000. 

And to this point there is shipped annually 600 tons of fertilizer, 1,000 tons of lime, 

5 carloads of wire fencing, and merchandise to the value of $150,000. 

The timber industry, giving employment to a great number of people, cutting the 
timber from a forest of about 60,000 acres, including the operation of the sawmills, is 
entirely dependent upon the Lake Drummond Canal for transporting their products 
to the markets. The aggregate shipment of said timber annually is about 5,000,000 
feet and entails a value of $60,000. 

It is believed that the report incorporating the recommendation of the purchase of 
the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal by the United States Government as a part of 
the proposed inland waterway by the Board of Engineers, making a survey of these 
proposed routes (the Albermarle and Chesapeake and Lake Drummond or Dismal 
Swamp Canal), was made and influenced by the only predominating feature of the 
Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal (that of nearer sea level than the Dismal Swamp 
Canal) that this work of the engineers was directed and done from an engineering 
standpoint, and that their labors were concentrated on the one engineering feature (the 
route nearest sea level), not considering the disastrous effect upon the interests of 
thousands dependent upon the Dismal Swamp Canal. 

Therefore, as a basis for our appeal to you to recommend in your report to Congress 
the purchase of the Dismal Swamp Canal by the United States Government and to be 
maintained as a free waterway, we submit the following: 

(1) That the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal, bordering as it does upon the very 
skirts of the sand banks on the coast and for a great part of the distance within reach 
of a shot of the gun of the enemy upon the Atlantic and in the wake of storms that sweep 
along the coast, affects the interests of but a small territory. 

(2) That the Lake Drummond Canal is from 25 to 40 miles from the sea and is through 
a great farming and timber region, affecting in acres several hundred thousand and in 
population many thousand people whose entire earthly belongings are along the route 
of this canal, and the value of which is entirely dependent upon this canal being 
maintained as a waterway as a means of transportation. 

(3) That the purchase of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal alone would not only 
result indirectly as a confiscation of the property of the Lake Drummond Canal 

6 Water Co., but would so depreciate the value of such vast amounts of property 
along its route that has derived its value through the improving and maintaining said 
canal as to be indirectly a confiscation of the property contiguous to this route and thus 
cause deterioration of this vast section of country and destruction of property rights 
which has cost years of toil and labor to the owners. 

(4) That in the event that the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal alone is purchased, 
it is evident from the report of the Board of Engineers that the owners of the Lake 
Drummond Canal should be indemnified, but as to the owners of property along the 
route of this canal, where is our right of appeal? From whence comes our indemnity? 

(5) That if the aggregated damage caused by the purchase of the Albemarle and 
Chesapeake Canal alone (resulting in the abandonment of the Lake Drummond Canal) 
was considered with reference to this purchase, the sum would more than reimburse 
the National Government for purchasing and maintaining the Lake Drummond Canal 
as a free waterway. 

Mr. Harvey M. Dickson (Norfolk). May I ask a question? 
Col. Abbott. Certainly. 



254 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



Mr. Dickson. What proportion of the tonnage passing through the Dismal Swamp 
Canal originates in the territory in which the canal is cut? 

Mr. W. I. Halstead (South Mills). Well, sir, I could not tell the exact portion. I 
would state that there is a great amount of it. 

Mr. M. K. King (Norfolk). About 50 per cent. 

Col. Abbott. Is there anyone else to appear on that side? 

Mr. King. Mr. Stewart, a Government employee in the Navy, has a very intelligent 
paper on this subject which I think would interest the board. 

Mr. R. E. B. Stewart (Portsmouth, Va.). Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the 
board, it is with reluctance that I appear before this board to discuss a question of 
such vital importance as the inland waterway project, and I recognize the fact that I 
am addressing experts in their profession who have technical knowledge which the 
average layman does not possess, yet I desire to present to this board some general 
observations, other than from an engineering standpoint, in connection with the pro- 
posed inland waterway between Norfolk Harbor and the Albemarle Sound, which, I 
think, should be carefully considered and investigated before any particular route is 
recommended. The question should be looked at from every phase. The matter of 
costs — that is, to cut so many cubic yards of earth between two given points — should 
not be considered, but only as to the best route for serving commerce, for the naval 
service in time of war, for drainage of swamp lands, for the utilization of water power, 
and for furnishing fresh water for the Government plants, to my mind, should be the 
main features in selecting a route, as the Army engineers have already pronounced 
each of the routes proposed practicable. In short, the route that will serve commerce 
and the Navy best, and at the same time pay back to the Government some revenue 
in return for the money invested, is the proper route to be selected over any other, and 
that one, in my opinion, is the Dismal Swamp Canal. 

Let us look for a moment at the relative merits of the two proposed routes — the 
Albemarle and Chesapeake and the Dismal Swamp Canals. 

Advantages of the Dismal Swamp Canal: 

(1) A shorter route. 

(2) It would drain most of the Dismal Swamp, provided the water in the canal was 
lowered, say, at least 2 feet, and open up to cultivation an immense area of fertile lands 
now lying idle, a great public improvement for Virginia and North Carolina. The 
scheme of drainage is practicable, as will be seen by the Tenth Annual Report of the 
United States Geological Survey and from practical demonstration by farmers along 
the line of the canal who have won to agriculture already a considerable portion of this 
morass of drainage. 

(3) A supply of fresh water could be furnished to the Norfolk Navy Yard, naval 
magazine, marine barracks, training station, and naval hospital; water is also fur- 
nished from the yard to ships there, and also carried to Hampton Roads and Newport 
News in water barges and tugs to ships stopping at these points at times. This would 
be a great saving to the Government, for last year from June 30, 1909, to July 1, 1910, 
$27,714.10 was paid to a private corporation for water, and the amount consumed is 
increasing every year. This does not include the cost of water used at marine barracks 
and naval hospital. 

(4) This route runs by Elizabeth City, one of the most important commercial towns 
in North Carolina; also is nearer the important commercial cities and towns of eastern 
North Carolina, contiguous to the Albemarle Sound and its connecting rivers. 

(5) Possibly it would be feasible to establish a fresh-water basin at the northern 
terminus of the canal (Deep Creek), for the use of laying up torpedo boats to free 
their bottoms of marine growths, or preferably to furnish water for a lay-up basin 
and timber basin established at the Norfolk Navy Yard. 

(6) Navigation would not be impeded on account of the winds and tides, which 
occasionally causes a depression of water in the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, 
and greatly interferes with navigation. 

(7) Nearer inland; therefore, is far removed from the range of the guns of an enemy. 
Disadavantages of the Dismal Swamp Canal: 

(1) Lock canal. 

(2) It runs along the eastern edge of the Swamp on virtually a hillside, and if a 
deeper channel was required without locks, it would have to be dredged to a greater 
depth from the surface of the earth than the other canal to make it a sea-level canal, 
and therefore would be impracticable. 

Advantages of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal: 

(1) Practically a sea-level canal. 

(2) Cheapest route to enlarge to the required depth as compared with making the 
Dismal Swamp a sea-level canal. 

Disadvantages of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route: 
(1) Longer route. 



INTRAC OASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 255 



(2) Salt water. It would be no profit to the Government as a source of water supply. 

(3) Its improvement would be of no benefit for the drainage of the adjacent lands 
for agricultural purposes. 

(4) It passes through a vast marsh section and lowlands where commerce is deficient 
and is far removed from any town or city of any consequence. 

(5) During certain seasons of high northwesterly and northeasterly winds the water 
is occasionally blown out, thereby interfering with navigation. 

(6) Possibly the most expensive route to maintain in the way of keeping the channel 
open on account of the shifting sands in the bottom of the sounds, rivers, etc., through 
which it passes. 

From this comparison which I make it will be seen that the only advantage of the 
Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal over the Dismal Swamp is that it is practically a sea- 
level canal. But, as a matter of fact, is not a lock canal preferable, as there is some 
difference in the tide level at each end, and in a lock canal there would be no effect 
from winds and tides, and when a vessel enters the locks it is known exactly how 
much water can be carried. The Panama Canal is a lock canal and the Chesapeake 
& Delaware also; then why object to Dismal Swamp on this account? By retaining 
the locks, the Dismal Swamp Canal can be deepened to a 12 or 16 foot channel 
through the other route and meet the demands of commerce better; besides, it has 
other features which tend to make it more desirable for the use of the Government 
from a financial standpoint. 

But, Mr. Chairman, I favor buying both canals. I do not believe it is just and 
right to buy one and leave the other out at a great financial loss to the owners, for they 
are competing lines, and both are dependent for their life upon the same territory for 
traffic. This would be a policy of confiscating private property. Surely Congress 
will never pass such radical legislation. It would be contrary to the fundamental laws 
of the land which guarantee to every citizen the protection of life and property. The 
Government has the best horn of dilemma in this matter. There have been three 
routes located; you can say to these private corporations "sell at a reasonable price, 
or we will build the Cooper Creek route," and they will sell, no doubt, at a reasonable 
sum under such circumstances, and no exorbitant price can be charged. 

Let both canals be purchased. The increased commerce incident to the opening 
of a deeper channel between Beaufort Inlet and the Chesapeake Bay should not be 
bottled up by one narrow canal cut which intersects the strip of land lying between 
Norfolk Harbor and the sounds of North Carolina. A cave-in or some unusual occur- 
rence might block the canal channel, which is dependent upon congressional appro- 
priations for maintenance, and which at times must wait for years to obtain and do 
untold injury to the commercial interests, when with two canals, furnishing double 
track navigation, as it were, no apprehension would be felt in this regard. 

Possibly a practicable and beneficial way for the Government to make use of both 
the Albemarle and Chesapeake and Dismal Swamp Canals, if taken over, would be 
to sheet pile and dredge both to a necessary depth, and make one a passageway for 
rafts, barges, and other tows, and the other for deeper draft vessels propelled exclu- 
sively by their own steam, with the exception of local tows and traffic; then there 
would be no likelihood that a congestion in traffic would occur, and it would not 
be necessary to widen either of the important waterways, except in a few turnouts. 
Or, another plan, one canal could be used for traffic going south and the other for 
that going north, if both had the same depth of water. 

But, Mr. Chairman, this is simply a suggestion. The main point is, that if these 
canals are taken over by the Government, they should be maintained, and at least 
reasonable transportation facilities furnished for the accommodation of the property 
owners and tax payers who live along these routes. The canal owners can sell out 
and one or the other canal put out of commission, but the people who have enjoyed 
these rights of transportation for their produce will have to suffer ; and I am here in a 
small part to represent the property owners along the route of the Dismal Swamp 
Canal, and to ask that you give the rights of the property owners especial attention 
in this matter. We have had the use of this canal for nearly a hundred years, and 
it has become a vested right to have the facilities for transportation afforded thereby. 
To abandon this route means a step backward for a hundred years possibly. Surely 
this will not be the policy in this progressive age of invention and progress. 

There is a sentiment, too, connected with this Dismal Swamp route. It was origi- 
nated by that great warrior and statesman George Washington, the Father of his Coun- 
try. He was one of the first stockholders, and it was his master mind that found 
out the wonders of the Swamp and as to the watersheds lying about Lake Drummond. 
He builded possibly better than he knew, for in spite of everything this large area 
of fertile swamp lands will some day in the near future be developed into the greatest 
garden spot in America. A private corporation, the Dismal Swamp Canal Co., 
when it took hold of the canal and enlarged it to meet the demands of trade, helped 



256 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



no little in hastening the progress of this much neglected section. Do not go back- 
ward in the march of progress. Take hold of this canal and maintain it, for its serv- 
ices are needed not only to develop this wonderland, but to assist in bearing the 
"white wings of commerce" over peaceful waters through the inside route to pour 
their valuable cargoes in the lap of trade, escaping the tortuous Hatteras where death 
and destruction constantly await a victim. 

I have the honor to suggest that the Secretary of the Navy be requested to appoint 
a board of naval officers from the Norfolk Navy Yard to cooperate with Col. Patrick 
to determine the possible utility of the Dismal Swamp route as a water supply, etc., 
as outlined in my remarks. [Applause.] 

Mr. M. K. King (Norfolk). This last delegation which came in is one from Eliza- 
beth City. Are you prepared to hear them? 

Col. Abbott. We will be glad to hear them. I would like to say that this morning, 
hearing your delegation would be late, I postponed the meeting an hour. At II 
o'clock I thought it not proper to keep the rest waiting, so we began the hearing. 

Mr. E. F. Lamb (Elizabeth City). We appreciate the courtesy. We are not surprised 
you took the course you did. 

I want to present and represent a party of citizens of my town for whom I speak this 
morning, and whose interests are at stake. 

While this is the first time I have had the honor of addressing a court made up of 
Army officers. I have long since learned by association to respect them for their official 
integrity, and to love them for their social qualities. 

In presenting my views on the subject under consideration, probably at times 
with too great zeal, let it not be inferred that I am lacking in respect for this court, 
or for the action of those engineers who have hitherto passed upon the relative present 
efficiency or future usefulness of Albemarle and Chesapeake and the Dismal Swamp 
Canals. 

As I understand it, it is your province to give a full hearing to all parties interested 
in the purchase by the Government of a route for the proposed Norfolk-Beaufort 
inland waterway; your report is to be the basis of an act of Congress providing for the 
purchase of the waterway route, and no contract can be made by the Secretary of War 
unless recommended by you. 

The jurisdiction of this court is therefore broad. You not only deal with the tech- 
nical engineering features of the project, but you are authorized to consider and weigh 
the equities, and to determine the justice with which the project is to be completed. 

I shall attempt to present to you the consequences of the proposed change, in behalf 
of those wards of the nation whose welfare is dependent upon the maintenance of the 
Dismal Swamp Canal. 

If I can emphasize sufficiently your obligation as representatives of our National 
Government, to exercise a paternal care and protection over the property of the people, 
a purpose for which the Government was founded and for which it continues to exist, 
I shall present my cause with more courage and possibly more grace. 

Let me assure you, sirs, it is a question of the greatest importance to those for whom 
I plead. 

To close the Dismal Swamp Canal means the destruction of the property of those 
living adjacent to the canal. It means in many instances the loss and abandonment 
of now thrifty homes. It means the displacement of Elizabeth City from the line of 
progress and development. It would spell ruin to a now rich and growing section of 
North Carolina, made accessible by the Dismal Swamp Canal, whose property values, 
with the closing of its only waterway, would shrink and decline to nothing. 

Such a policy would be in direct conflict with the present plans of the Federal Gov- 
ernment in the reclamation of arid lands in the West ; contrary to the policy enforced 
in the drainage of swamps in the South; contrary to the good -roads movement through- 
out the country, and in violation of the general policy of extending deeper waterways. 

It would be a policy of destruction, and not a policy of conservation. It would 
•destroy # the interests of a people, and not build them up. 

It may be said that we have the Norfolk-Southern Railway at Elizabeth City. 
Surely because we have the railroad is no reason for taking from us this waterway. 

It may be said that we will have a free canal by the Albemarle and Chesapeake 
route to offset the old toll canal by the Dismal Swamp. 

The people of my section would bear their share of the expense of establishing and 
maintaining a deeper waterway. 

Better by far to pay toll and keep open the existing route than to be taxed and 
deprived of our only waterway, to support a route that would destroy property values, 
and ruin our gmwing city. 

If the free inland waterway should go by the Albermarle and Chesapeake Canal it 
wiM we&D. 40 mjfes farther haul to Elizabeth City traffic. The longer haul means 



JNTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 257 



higher charges and loss of time, and the selection of the Albermarle and Chesapeake 
Canal means to Elizabeth City a loss of all commerce along the line of the new inland 
waterway, and the removal of existing trade; a drop from the skyline of commercial 
activity to the abyss of dead and forgotten settlements. 

So you will understand, sirs, that we are here to fight for our lives. The fight, 
thank God, is not among our enemies, but among our friends. 

Our enemies they are who charge that we are delaying this great project that has 
been the dream of legislators for years. That charge is a stab from the hands of a 
Brutus who has fed at our breast. 

This is a section that has grown rich from the ship cargoes that have emptied into 
Norfolk the golden grain, the cotton and timber, the products of North Carolina, a 
land it has pleased God to smile upon. 

Norfolk has prospered and grown by the brain and brawn of North Carolinans who 
came here at the close of the Civil War and gave this city the impetus largely respons- 
ible to-day for the success the city has attained. 

The relations, commercially and socially, between Norfolk and northeastern North 
Carolina have ever been of the closest, and it is no stretch of the imagination to assert 
that the Dismal Swamp Canal has been a link between the people of the two States; 
for many years it was the only means of communication, save by the worst highways 
conceivable. 

We have had the Dismal Swamp since the earliest days of this American Govern- 
ment. Washington Irving relates a trip on horseback made by the Father of His 
Country, when his horse sank into the mire of the Dismal Swamp. 

It is a historical fact that George Washington was connected as an engineer with 
a survey and laying out of the canal. 

The Virginia Legislature passed an act in 1787 authorizing the construction of what 
afterwards became the Dismal Swamp Canal, though they were 30 years completing 
it. This canal remained the only water route from the sounds of North Carolina to 
Norfolk for a period of 50 years, during which it was the bottle of milk upon which 
the municipal infant at the North Carolina end fed with ravenous appetite (The 
construction of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal began in 1856.) 

It is a matter of record from the engineer's office of the United States Army, Norfolk, 
Va., August 31, 1903, that the General Government ordered a survey in 1837, from the 
southern end of Dismal Swamp C?*nal southward to Winyah Bay, S. C. 

In 1875 another survey covering generally the same territory as at present under 
consideration. 

And another in 1878 of all water lines and routes leading from the harbor of Norfolk, 
Va., to the Atlantic Ocean south of Hatteras. 

In 1894 Congress directed the survey of the waterways through the sounds of North 
Carolina and of the Dismal Swamp Canal, Virginia and North Carolina, and of the 
rivers and water connections connecting said canal with the sounds of North Carolina. 

In 1900 another examination and survey was ordered, this time from the southern end 
of the Dismal Swamp Canal to Beaufort Inlet, through a route specified in the act to 
pass via Croatan, Pamlico, and Core Sounds. 

The Dismal Swamp Canal, so says the record, throughout its whole extent passes 
through what was originally the Dismal Swamp, but from which large tracts have been 
reclaimed by drainage. 

The point I make, if the court pleases, is that since the earliest days of the develop- 
ment of this section of country, the Dismal Swamp Canal was the keystone to the arch 
upon which we built. Since the ditch that first floated the logs that were used by the 
Government to construct a navy, we have drained the lands, shipped the timber, 
builded cities and villages and established homes that vie in comfort and elegance 
with the best settlements of North Carolina and Virginia. 

All of which was made possible by the use of the Dismal Swamp Canal. The Dismal 
Swamp Canal is ours by right. We have opened up lands that are unsurpassed in pro- 
ductiveness by any other lands upon the globe. 

For agriculture the valley of the Nile can not excel it. There are thousands of acres 
of such lands, cultivated and producing wealth to the country, equal to the famous 
gold mines of the West. There are hundreds of thousands of acres waiting for the 
spade and plow. 

We have mortgaged those lands in many instances, and have built upon them sub- 
stantial homes, and are looking ahead to greater advancements in wealth and civiliza- 
tion through the efforts of our children. 

Along the banks of the Dismal Swamp Canal the villages of Deep Creek and South 
Mills have been planted. They are remote from all other means of transportation. 

On the river south of the canal is situated Elizabeth City, with its 12,000 population, 
most vitally interested in this subject at issue. 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2—17 



258 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C 



A city up to date in all the modern features of a growing community. Handsome 
public buildings, educational institutions of the highest order, beautiful residences, 
telegraph and telephone systems, first-class banking facilities, an extra good harbor, 
extensive marine railways, manufacturing plants, and a commercial business, whole- 
sale and retail, a city twice its size might envy. Our forest products handled in Eliza- 
beth City during the past year foots up 242,990 tons. The farm products, 55,079 tons. 

The water products, 28,262 tons, giving credit to us for the contribution to the 
three great essentials of life — food, shelter, and raiment — the sum total of 326,336 
tons. May it please the court, I can not omit to add, we have 400 tons of holly and 
mistletoe to our credit, and that we are contributing our share of the joys and pleasures 
of our fellow man and to the happiness of the children of this great country, to whose 
welfare you have devoted your lives. 

Do not understand me to rest our commercial strength upon those items alone. 
Our coal freights add up 11,000 tons, wire fencing and nails 2,100 tons, our textile 
mills 3,000 tons. 

I will not tax you with a full list, but there are hundreds of articles of freight that 
can be added hereto. I have not included drugs and spirits, scrap iron and metals, 
cotton seed, honey and beeswax, hides and tallow, horses and mules, farming imple- 
ments, stoves, hooded shelves, empty barrels and crates, oil, over 600 barrels a month, 
fertilizers, wreckage from Hatteras, pianos and organs,, automobiles and bicycles, 
carriages, wagons, and harness, rags and bones, electric motors, steel cables, steam 
and plumbing supplies, boilers and engines, rafting gear, steam hoisters and iron 
skidders, etc. 

The growth of our city has been steady and devoid of a shadow of a boom. All 
lines of development have kept pace with the normal growth. The First National 
Bank was organized in 1891, at that time the deposits were $50,000. Later the Citi- 
zens Bank came into existence, which was followed by the Savings Bank and Trust 
Co., then the Mercantile Bank; the combined deposits of these banks foot up 
$1,000,000. 

The post-office receipts have steadily increased $1,000 per year for the past 10 
years. The taxable value of the county 20 years ago was less than $1,500,000; in 
1909 it was $4,184,316. 

Since the reopening of the Dismal Swamp Canal the growth of our trade and devel- 
opment has increased 25 per cent. 

With the opening of the standardized canal and the retention of the Dismal Swamp 
Canal our city will increase its commerce tenfold in the next 10 years. 

In arguing the merits of my cause it becomes necessary to touch upon the findings 
of the engineers in the reports heretofore made: 

"Before entering into a comparison of the different possible routes for the waterway 
there is an important question to be decided: Shall the waterway be constructed as 
a seaWevel? 

"After a consideration of all these and other points, the board is of the opinion that 
the waterways as constructed should be at sea level, and in comparing the different 
possible routes, they all have been considered with reference to their feasibility for 
the construction of a sea-level canal." 

Quoting from this same report, we have this under the following heading: 

"cooper creek route. 

"This route proceeds by the shortest line from Elizabeth River to Albemarle Sound, 
and avoids the most tortuous portions of both the Elizabeth and Pasquotank Rivers." 

Further along, the report centers down to the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal and 
Cooper Creek: 

"Assuming for the purpose of comparison that all the rights and property of the 
canal company would be ceded to the United States free, a route by the canal seems 
to have the advantage of a slightly smaller first cost, the difference being $42,000 in 
a total of about $5,000,0Q0. 

"If, however, the cost of maintenance be considered, the advantage is on the other 
side. The Cooper Creek route passes practically for its whole extent through the 
interior, where the cost of maintenance will be light, while the canal route passes for 
a long distance through the open part of Currituck Sound. As regards navigation, the 
canal route is several miles longer, and vessels passing by it will, while in Currituck 
Sound, be exposed to the winds and storms from the open ocean. 

"It has also another great disadvantage in that the water level in Currituck Sound 
is subject to greater fluctuation, and especially depression, than any other portion of 
these water routes. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 259 



"Taking into consideration, therefore, not only the first cost but also probable cost 
of maintenance, the ease of navigation, the length of the two routes, the question of 
the relative protection from storm, and the fluctuation in the water level, the board 
is of the opinion that the Cooper Creek route is the better, and in the long run prove 
the cheaper, even on the assumption that the rights and property of the canal company 
could be acquired free." 

Still quoting from the report: 

"The law is mandatory, however, only as to any private waterway that it may be 
to the interest of the United States to acquire. In the opinion of the board it is not 
to the interest of the United States to acquire any of the existing waterways, for the 
reason that the Cooper Creek route appears to be the best and really the least expensive 
line fur the waterway, and by adopting it all complications as to the purchase of either 
the whole or part of either of the existing canals are avoided. 

"The board has, therefore, no hesitation in recommending for this division of the 
waterway the Cooper Creek route." 

In summing up the entire route selected by the board of engineers the report has 
this to say: 

"This route has the advantage of the greatest possible amoimt of protection from 
storms throughout its lengths, of having safe harbors at each end of every land cut, of 
passing close to Elizabeth City, etc." 

In the conclusion covering the entire route from Norfolk, Va., to Beaufort Inlet, 
N. C, the engineers say that — 

"After carefully considering all available data as to its present and prospective 
commerce, the board is of the opinion that the route herein recommended for inland 
navigation between Norfolk, Va., and Beaufort Inlet, N. C, is feasible, and that the 
estimated cost of same is not out of proportion to the extent of said commerce added to 
the importance of the completed waterway as a factor in coast defense. 

"Chas. J. Allen, 
"Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers. 

"James B. Quinn, 
"Lieutenant Colonel, Corps of Engineers. 

"E. EVELETJT WlNSLOW, 

"Captain, Corps of Engineers. 

"Brig. Gen. G. L. Gillespie, 

" Chief of Engineers, United States Army." 

It is not for the purpose of inducing you' to declare in favor of the Cooper Creek route 
I have gone so much into details on so familiar a subject, nor am I ignorant of my ap- 
parent inconsistency in making prominent the advantages of that route; but in all 
fairness and with candor I can not but be impressed with the possible action of this 
board in a question that so vitally affects the successful issue of this great canal system. 

It would be a great presumption on my part to say that in the event the Cooper 
Creek route was adopted and constructed by the Government what action Congress 
should take in reimbursing those who would suffer by the loss of one or both the 
other canals. 

There is one feature relative to the opening of the Cooper Creek route that was not 
touched upon by the engineers. That was the drainage of an immense section of 
the most fertile land of eastern Carolina. 

It is fair to infer that Congress was influenced by other reasons than that of expe- 
diency when they passed the acts of 1909 directing this investigation to the two 
canals, with this report of the engineers before them. 

If it was in consideration of existing interests they passed this act, then my point 
is made good, that this court would be justified in giving full consideration of the 
interests of those I represent. 

Pardon me if I go into the comparative merits of the two canals in a general way 
to further sustain my position. 

We are not here for the purpose of hindering and delaying the construction of the 
inland waterway, and we emphasize our position, that we are in favor of such action as 
3hall be taken by this board, provided we have secured to us the use of the Dismal 
Swamp Canal for such purposes as it is now used for. 

Adding to the force of the statement made by the board relative to the difficulty 
from storms and water depressions, I volunteer the information, the sailor man will 
corroborate, that during several months of the year the traffic through the Albemarle 
& Chesapeake Canal is often congested by storms and tides. 



260 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



Reverting, then, briefly to the relative values of lands affected: 

Along the Dismal Swamp Canal there are prosperous farms and thriving villages 
depending upon their success on the transportation afforded by the canal. 

Much now unimproved land is susceptible to drainage and subsequent cultivation. 

Along the Chesapeake there is little agricultural land, and little susceptible to 
improvement. 

In conclusion, sirs, I would remind you that upon your decision depends the 
future of our people of northeastern North Carolina. 

If the Dismal Swamp Canal is closed, we have indeed no future, or at best a black 
one, a prospect I fear to contemplate, a promise of abandoned homes and deserted 
communities. 

If you leave to them their existing waterway, yours will be the hand that will 
wave the magic wand to conjure up thrift and content, well-to-do farmers in a rich 
country, growing villages, and thrifty cities in a section whose commercial develop- 
ment will keep pace with the great benefits of the greater inland waterway. 

We are pleading, not for an idle cause, not for a matter of greater convenience; we 
are pleading with you for our lives. Is our prayer to be answered with a blessing or 
with a curse? Sirs, I thank you. 

Mr. J. B. Leigh (Elizabeth City). Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I doubt not you 
are getting wearied with so much talking, because on a common question of this kind 
there is a great deal of repetition. 

After what has been said to you, you can see we are very much interested in this 
inland-waterway project down our way. We deem that it means a great deal to us, 
and, as we see it, to adopt another route than one of the two that goes to the Pasquotank 
River will do us and our section a great injury. While, on the other hand, to under- 
stand the value of the two waterways, it can not hurt any other territory, because the 
reports of the engineers, as I understand, show that about 4 miles from North River 
the distance to Norfolk through either of these routes is about the same, being about 
a mile shorter through the Dismal Swamp Canal than through the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal. The people who live directly on and who are interested in the 
Dismal Swamp Canal can not be hurt by the adoption of either of the routes that comes 
out of Pasquotank River, because you can take it up and down and they meet at a 
common point. All the proposed routes converge in the Elizabeth River; therefore, 
the Norfolk end, no matter which you may select, makes it equally convenient to 
Norfolk and everything north of this end of the canal; so, therefore, as I see it, we 
who live on these canals are the people who must go to the Government, as the Govern- 
ment must put up the costs. 

As I understand, the object of the Government in these internal improvements is to 
do the greatest good to the greatest number. We are willing to go down or rise upon 
that proposition. As we understand it, our purpose is not to confiscate the property 
of either canal. I do not believe the Government will do that. Of course, as coming 
from us, we can not be so patriotic as to give up our commerce for the upbuilding of 
some other locality. 

Our community has grown up from the very day of the beginning of the Lake Drum- 
mond Canal. Our town began the very year, according to Wheeler, that this canal 
was first opened (in 1874 I think it was — that is, the first grant or concession of land). 
From that time we have grown up and have been growing up to the present time. 

To cut us off puts us at greater distance from Norfolk, or the Elizabeth River, while 
all the other people who may be interested, or who may go through this canal, have the 
same advantage if you adopt the Dismal Swamp route, because they are as close to 
Chesapeake Bay, or Norfolk, or the Atlantic Ocean, as they would be if you took the 
other route. According to the Engineers' report they are 1 mile nearer. Should it be 
the policy of the Government that they should depreciate the value of our property, 
stop the progress of our town, for the purpose of putting a canal through and putting 
it 30 or 40 miles farther from the town, and thus shut out competition between the 
present canal and the railroad line? We do not believe that. 

The Government went there some years ago, and they regarded us as the commercial 
center of eastern North Carolina; they appropriated $140,000 to give us a post office 
and grounds. They had great faith in us. We have shown them that their faith in us 
was not ill shown. It has been said our post-office receipts have increased $1,000 or 
more a year, and our commercial increase has been as great. I think in and around 
Elizabeth City we have spent $500,000 or more in building manufacturing plants and 
other improvements, and all these buildings and plants are to a great extent predi- 
cated upon this inland waterway, because one of the greatest manufacturing plants 
we have is the Dare Lumber Co.; up to September 1 they have shipped 27,000,000 
feet of timber, of which only 9,000,000 feet had gone by rail; the other had gone by 



INTRACOASTAL, WATEKWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, W. C. 261 



this canal. To say that it will not discommode this and other lumber companies to go 
40 or 50 miles out of the way, will be a hardship on them. 

As I understand, it is the purpose to build an inland waterway, and not build a 
waterway subject to the Atlantic storms, which are constantly bottling up and choking 
up the canal. 

All these engineers come and in their reports tell us that the Dismal Swamp Canal 
is a way secure and protected from storms. 

To you gentlemen it would be foolish to talk from a military standpoint what the 
effect would be. In case of war with a foreign country, that place would be under 
the direct charge of their guns from the Atlantic Ocean. In building this canal we 
are not building it for a day, or 10 years, or 100 years, but as a Government improve- 
ment. They should not contemplate conditions as they exist to-day, but in the 
future, and not only build a canal of inland waterway that will protect us in time of 
peace, but we should build with a view to what may happen in the future. If two 
routes are marked out, as I see it, the route should be chosen which will insure a pro- 
tection at all times. According to the report of the engineers, if you take the route 
of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, at the mouth of the North River, they tell me 
that there is a bar out there that it is almost impossible to secure a permanent water- 
way there. On the Pasquotank River, while there is a shoal there, we have a chan- 
nel 12 feet deep. Up this way we have the whole Currituck Sound, which is affected 
by the coast winds. Up this other way (the Dismal Swamp), it is inland and not 
affected by the tide or by the winds at all, because it is internal. 

It has been said it will have a tendency to bring to cultivation a great tract of land, 
as rich as anybody can imagine, as rich as now on the Beaufort Sound, just as rich as 
the Hyde County land. The soil in the Dismal Swamp land is from 7 to 10 feet 
deep. If the Government builds up wealth along the route of this canal as we are 
doing, it adds to the wealth of the nation; therefore, we are strengthening the arm of 
the nation. But for the Government to come and build another canal, so it can not 
possibly be developed beyond a slight degree, and shut out this territory that has 
been developing and growing and increasing in population the past 100 years, it is 
doing great injury to us. We do not want to do anything to the disadvantage of any 
people in North Carolina or any other part of the world, but we do ask for fair play. 
We say if either of these routes affects anybody alike, except the people in our imme- 
diate section, we say our progress should not be stopped, that our wealth ought not 
to be curtailed. 

We have a population of 30,000 or 40,000 people who are directly interested in this 
route. The adoption of this route and opening of this canal means a great deal to 
30,000 or 40,000 people. The tax rate in our community is $3,000,000, and that means 
a value of $8,000,000 or $10,000,000, because you know the tax rate is never more than 
one-third of the real value, and it means the jeopardizing of these vast interests. I do 
not mean to say you are going to confiscate that propery, but it puts us out of the way. 
It does virtually confiscate that property, because they are virtually cut off from 
outside communication. It means the cutting down of value at least from one-half 
to two-thirds of this section. It means cutting off our town from competition with 
Norfolk and Chesapeake Bay. We necessarily feel interested in it. 

We do hope we can impress upon you gentlemen our earnestness and our zeal. 
The Government has helped our town. They have seen that there was something 
in our location. They have seen that there is something in the progress we are 
making. They have seen that they were justified in spending $140,000 there, and 
now here is a proposition to cut down the faith the Government had in us. It means 
that we must curtail our manufacturing and commercial establishments. It means 
that we are put at the mercy of only one line of transportation; that we must go out 
of our way 30 or 40 miles. When we go through the Dismal Swamp Canal it will not 
put a person in North Carolina a single mile out of their way, and for the Government 
to say that for a few thousand dollars they will make all these people suffer, I think 
places a hardship that the Government will not perpetrate upon the people. 

According to the report of the engineers the extra cost of this other canal will compel 
the people of this section to lose that much money, and more, too, because you take 
$8,000,000 or $10,000,000 in our county and $4,000,000 or $5,000,000 in Camden County 
in keeping away manufacturing plants — because we do not know that manufacturing 
plants are looking for cheapest freights — if we cut off one of our lines of communication 
it is an invitation to the manufacturing plants looking for location to go elsewhere. 
We do not know to what extent in dollars and cents the change of this route of canal 
will hurt Elizabeth City and this community, because we are dependent on this 
route. If you adopt the Dismal Swamp route, and give us any fair chance, it will 
save several hundred thousand dollars put down there that will cost to dredge out 



262 INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, 1ST. C 



Pasquotank River; you can't go up the Pasquotank River unless some dredging is 
done. If you take it up in South Mills and that section, it will have to be dredged 
to give a fair chance. Certainly the Government will not work such a hardship on 
that section as to give those people an outlet and say to these people who live up 
there we will not. The time will come, and it is right here now, that the Govern- 
ment will have to go and dredge this out at an additional cost. It is as near for the 
people of Currituck County to come our way as to go through the Albemarle & 
Chesapeake Canal. In fact, two-thirds of their commerce comes to Elizabeth City. 
There is only a small part that goes out through Currituck Sound. It will not incom- 
mode these people any until you get up to North Landing River. 

Take the whole thing as we have presented it, which route will do the least damage 
to the most people? We have endeavored to show to your honorable board that neither 
community at either end of the canal will be affected as to the distance or the haul 
that they will receive, except a mile or two. Take the routes of the two canals, 
the territory that they pierce. Which canal will do the greatest damage — I mean 
the shutting up of which canal will do the greatest damage? We have in one section 
of the Dismal Swamp Canal 3 miles through this peninsula Coinjock; two-thirds of 
those people go to Elizabeth City through the canal or by rail. The only village is 
Coinjock. I believe there is one manufacturing plant there, and there is the little 
village of Mundens Point, which was started incident to the coming of the Norfolk & 
Southern Railroad. We have at Elizabeth City cotton mills and other plants, the 
aggregate capital of which is over $1,000,000. It is going to put them about 30 miles 
farther from Norfolk. We go up 22 miles, and every foot of this land can be put to 
the finest state of cultivation. It is the richest soil we can get, because it is the 
accumulation of vegetable matter which has been there accumulating and decaying. 
It will produce anything that we want to put in the soil. That whole territory will 
be virtually confiscated until some thrifty person comes through with a railroad. 

We come to South Mills and Wallaceton; they have manufacturing plants there, 
and there are most valuable farming lands up and down this canal. All these will 
be greatly depreciated in value if this canal is closed up. Elizabeth City is bound 
to be put back years and years in its growth. The post-office receipts must be cut 
off, and the faith of the Government in Elizabeth City must be depreciated because 
her facilities for dealing with the outside world will not be what they were when the 
Government came to see us and established our $'140,000 post office. 

The only thing we want is fair play. We do not want to hurt any other interest of 
North Carolina, but do not put us 30 or 40 miles from Chesapeake Bay when you can 
put us the same distance as the rest of North Carolina by using this old canal. We 
ask you to deal with us as you wish to be dealt by in this matter. 

Somebody may say if you shut up this thing it will bring more trade to Norfolk. 
That may be so, but we are willing to compete with any town, when it comes to hustling, 
if we have the same natural advantages. We do not ask you to give us the advan- 
tages of some place superior in wealth. We ask you, gentlemen, whether this must 
be a lock canal or sea-level canal, to look over the whole territory to see if we are not 
warranted in the request we make that you give us the Dismal Swamp Canal, or some 
canal that will tap the Pasquotank River, and not put back in its progress a town that 
has been growing and increasing and doubling in population almost every 10 years. 
Our population in 1890 was a little over 3,000; in 1900 it was between 6,000 and 7,000; 
and this census gives a little over 12,000. 

T \Ye feel our progress will stop with the closing of this canal; that we will be greatly 
handicapped if you cut off this way of transportation to us to the disadvantage of 30 
or 40 miles. 

God has given us a grand, good location, and we think the Government will not 
thwart the purposes of our Creator, but it will continue its munificent effort to help 
us and to increase the wealth of our people. 

Mr. George W. P. Overman (Norfolk, Va.). The honorable Board of Army Engi- 
neers: Gentlemen, I am here representing the American Association of Masters, Mates, 
and Pilots that now operates the vessels navigating in these canals. Our membership 
is approximately 300 in this locality, and we have been considering this matter before 
you from a citizen standpoint and a practical standpoint. We thank you for this 
opportunity to present our views on this subject, and we have the following: 

Whereas, there is to be a public hearing before a board of United States Army 
engineers, who will sit at Norfolk, Va., September 6, to listen to arguments from all 
those concerned in the selection of one of the (two) canals that connect the inland 
waters of Virginia and North Carolina, viz, Albemarle & Chesapeake and Dismal 
Swamp Canals; therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the Progressive Harbor No. 9, American Association of Masters, 
Mates, and Pilots, of Norfolk, Va., do hereby unanimously indorse the Dismal Swamp 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 263 



Canal as the proper route to be purchased, improved, and maintained as an open and 
free watercourse between Norfolk, Va., and the sounds of North Carolina, for the 
following reasons, viz: 

(1) That by the large number of shipping concerns that are using it in preference to 
the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, thereby establishing the fact of choice of the 
two routes. 

(2) It lies through the most fertile section of Virginia and North Carolina, and its 
inestimable wealth, when drained by the deepening and widening of this canal, is 
now unknown to the many people that will be attracted to this section when such 
improvements are made; the thousands of acres of the most fertile land, now covered 
with an abundance of timber, and when this has been removed the yield of farm 
products will be sufficient to startle the imagination of the most skeptical mind, and 
increase the mercantile, shipping, and manufacturing industry beyond conception. 

(3) At present it affords the most convenience to the shipping interests, such as 
points of supplies, repairs, and communications, and this present advantage will 
contribute materially in the improvements of this canal. 

(4) From a military or strategic standpoint it will afford the most protected route 
during any time of national or foreign hostilities, such as being out of reach of the 
guns of the enemy that may get advantage of the coast. 

(5) That the number of towns and villages lying on the banks of this route should 
be taken into consideration of what their commercial value would become with such 
improvements and what would be their destiny if this route should be rejected. 

(6) That at Elizabeth City, N. C, is afforded an excellent harbor for all vessels 
while waiting for a tow, and the great convenience of a quick and direct railroad 
between there and Norfolk, all methods of communication; repairs can be made or 
supplies furnished while waiting there for favorable weather or to be towed through 
to Norfolk. 

(7) While we realize that it will require a vast amount of work and a great expendi- 
ture of money to make the required improvements, we do not lose sight of the fact 
that the revenue derived therefrom will amply compensate the efforts made and reim- 
burse the Government for the outlay of the required amount of money for such improve- 
ments. Therefore, we, the practical men that will have to handle the life and prop- 
erty that will be constantly afloat on this route, believe that we are capable of some 
judgment in the matter, and it is with all seriousness that we ask you to consider the 
interest of the public and not the wish of a few in this all important matter of selection. 

Resolved, further, That a suitable committee shall be appointed to present these 
resolutions before the Board of United States Army Engineers at the hearing on 
Tuesday, September 6. 

Mr. M. K. King (Norfolk). Mr. Lindsey is the owner of the farm of 3,200 acres under 
cultivation on the Dismal Swamp Canal. 

Mr. Frank Lindsey (Portsmouth). I want to say that I represent the community 
of Deep Creek, with a population of about 100 thriving and thrifty farmers, people 
representing 10,000 acres of cultivated land. We ask your careful consideration 
before condemning the Dismal Swamp Canal. Through this canal "we get our crops 
to market and our necessary supplies, fertilizer, etc., for the farms. We ask that you 
will not condemn it. 

Col. Abbot. I would like to ask you one question. Supposing the canal was put 
there at sea level instead of at its present level, would that do any damage to the 
agricultural interests lying there contiguous, damage to wells, by drawing off too 
much water? 

Mr. Lindsey. I will quote from experts of the Agricultural Department who say 
that if that canal were made a sea-level canal the land brought under cultivation will 
solve the question of the high cost of living. It will bring under cultivation a great 
quantity of land and reduce the cost of living one-half; it will bring into cultivation 
the greatest garden spot of the world — not of America, but of the world. I can s1?ate 
that at my own expense I have built a dredge to drain my land to act in conjunction 
with the Dismal Swamp Canal Co., and this year's increase will pay for it. That is 
based on the present level of the land, by lowering the water in my ditches. I have 
had several of the Government engineers there, and they stated if the canal was 
lowered 2 feet it would bring into cultivation the greatest garden spot. 

Col. Abbot. We would like to know whether it would ruin everything in the 
immediate vicinity? 

Mr. Lindsey. No. You will have sand drainage, and you will be able to .put 
gang plows and steam plows in and plow as they do in the West. 
Col. Sanford. What is the nature of this land? 

Mr. Lindsey. The very richest. It has a subsoil of clay and loam, and oyster 
ehells, and decayed vegetation. I understand you gentlemen propose a trip through 



264 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



there ; I would like to have you look into that feature when you take the trip through 
the canal. I would like very much to have you as guests on the farm and show you 
the drainage features. 

Col. Abbot. Is there anyone else to be heard from on that side? [No response.] 
Now, I would be glad to hear from some one representing another interest. I under- 
stand from Mr. King that the interests of the Dismal Swamp Canal have been pre- 
sented. Who represents the other side? 

Mr. D. S. Burwell (general manager of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal). After 
this forensic oratory, I do not think we have anything to say. We can't match the 
oratory. 

I want to congratulate my friends from Elizabeth City on the showing that they 
have made. The only thing I rise to say is that the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal 
deserves a good many of the harsh things said about it, but I do not think we deserve 
them all. 

I have been with the canal 17 years and watched the tides, and the fluctuations 
in the water level of the canal since my 17 years' connection with the canal company, 
made by the wind, has not been over 2 feet. That has been the worst storm that 
we ever had, and it took four or five days to get it out. We feel that very much when 
it is down 6 inches, because vessels going through are loaded down to the very gun- 
wales. Vessels are loaded to a 9-foot depth, and a difference of 6 inches in the water 
hurts very much; it would almost stop traffic, but this has never occurred. 

One of the speakers referred to North River Bar. It is singular that he is not better 
posted, because they are well-posted men. North River Bar was a menace, but 
some years ago the Government put range lights there. They have not had any 
trouble there for five or six years. That trouble has gone by. I just want to correct 
that impression, that there is no trouble there. The whole trouble with the route 
is winds and tides. That is all we have to say about the physical conditions of the 
canal. 

The Albemarle & Chesapeake Co., which I have the honor to represent, simply 
places themselves behind the Engineers' report, whatever that report may be. They 
represent the people of North Carolina and Virginia and the people down the coast 
as far as Florida will have a free waterway. The Deeper Waterway Association 
speaks for the people; they have trusted to the engineers to build that waterway, 
and that is what they will have — what the engineers say. 

As to buying both canals, I am an old enough man to remember when 40 acres and a 
mule was the battle cry when we looked upon the freedman. The question is whether 
we have got to the darkey or the darkey has gotten to us. I am heartily in favor of 
the Government buying both canals, and it would be a good solution of the matter. 
We would be glad to get rid of our property, and would like for our friends to get rid 
of theirs. 

There is, however, the question of getting the through waterway. 

I want you to understand that the Albemarle & Chesapeake has her faults, but there 
is no use in exaggerating them. We have only 11 miles of artificial waterway, and we 
have rivers that can be easily canalized, and the engineers can make it a safer route; 
the Albemarle & Chesapeake is the best route for you to consider, if you consider the 
wants of the whole country. I thank you, gentlemen. 

Mr. Tait (of Currituck County). I am very well acquainted with the tidal conditions 
of eastern North Carolina. I am a native of Currituck County. I am thoroughly 
familiar with the tidal sections in this country, and I want to say to you that the 
influences that lower the tides in the Albermarle & Chesapeake Canal lower alike the 
tides in the Pasquotank River. Our North Carolina sounds act like a siphon; when 
the wind is from the north or northeast, of long duration, the water driven by the wind 
from the northern section of Albemarle Sound and the rivers emptying into Albemarle 
Sound is driven through the Pamlico and Roanoke Sounds and creates high tides. 
The same influences which lower the tides in Albemarle lower the tides in Pasquotank; 
the same influences that raise the tides in one raise them in the other. The tides, as I 
have said, act like a siphon. We are not under the influence of the ocean tides at all. 
The tides are acted upon entirely by the wind. 

Currituck County has not sent a delegation here to worry the board about where the 
inland waterway shall go. We realize that eastern North Carolina and the whole 
United States needs an inland waterway. We have not got a delegation to show why it 
ehould be cut through Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal. I want to say that all the 
agricultural values are not right in Pasquotank and Elizabeth City. I want to say 
that land values in Currituck, through which the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal 
asses, have increased tenfold in 10 years. Agricultural lands that you could buy for 
10 an acre 10 years ago you can not buy at $100 an acre. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 265 



We have not any incorporated towns in the county, but we have a progressive, 
hardworking, economical county, that is progressive along agricultural lines. 

Our county is willing to leave that question with the great Government and with the 
board. 

J. J. Woodley (Washington County). I am from the south side of Albemarle Sound. 
I would like to be heard, if you can bear with me a little. 

I may start from home. Education has caused the agitation, and the agitation is 
crying for fear. We can even go down to Roanoke Island, and when you disturb that 
you can distribute agitation to know for why he is disturbed. 

Our people are greatly disturbed, and well they may be. It reminds me, when I 
look at the city of Elizabeth City, with her ornaments, as on the banks of the Nile, 
what is the matter? Your honorable board, we have reached these things 1,200 years 
before Christ come. When they would have no floods down the Nile they thought it 
was something that they had done with the Deity, that the Deity was displeased with. 
They did not go and take off the lowest of them for a sacrifice, but some lady of high 
birth, some Coptic maiden that stood high — nothing against her character, because 
she must be pure. She would dress in her finest apparel, her jewels all upon her, but 
with her arms tied down to her side and her ankles in fetters. 

What is the matter to-day? When I look on the other side, I see old Aunt Dare 
standing by the side of the Pasquotank, with her ornaments on her, and, with all her 
failures for the last 50 years, she has been growing and growing greater. 

I say she is bound to your honorable board to-day to say whether she shall be cast 
down, and I pray God you will look on her with an eye of pity and say whether she 
shall be cast down or lifted up. We will give her an outlet, and her outlet shall not 
be closed, and we will give her a better one. She needs it, she deserves, and I say it is 
expedient that she has it. 

We need it also up in my county; we are petitioning the Government to give us 
an opening also. We have, like the Dismal Swamp land, the finest lands in the world. 
I can agree with Mr. Lindsey and the other gentleman. The gentlemen from Wash- 
ington City say we have the finest land that has been analyzed in the laboratory of 
chemistry in Washington City. We have the resources, and we want them developed. 
We want your honorable board to think upon us and think upon us justly and kindly, 
and with the help of God to relieve us of the burden that we have been carrying. We 
are taxed with heavy freights, we are taxed with long routes, and we want them 
thrown off. 

What made Rome great in the days of her greatness? I am not speaking to people 
who don't know. It was her national highways. What made Napoleon so victorious 
in his day? It was his great national highway that he could pounce down upon his 
enemy with swift dispatch and destroy them before they got ready. That is what 
will make us people great when you open up the ways so we may have facilities for 
communication with all people. We did not want to get into the fight. We are not 
working for one canal or for the other. I have no interest in either canal, nary a 
dollar, but I say open it up and let us have the cities connected together, where we 
can have something valuable, earned by all. What good would it do to build a great 
highway across the barren sands of Sahara, when there is nothing to carry, just for 
the sake of building a highway? What is the use in going through the sound when we 
do not come in contact with a place of importance until we reach Newbern? Let us 
go by Elizabeth City where we come in contact with the cities that will grow up like 
magic. If you do, your honorable board, we will thank you. If you do not, we will 
say the ode about Elizabeth: 

Sad, sad, will be your sadness, 

But glad, glad, will be your gladness. 

If you only make her glad by saying "this is not the route; we will not cut you off> 
but will hold you." 

We thank you for your earnestness and the time you have given us, hoping you 
will look upon us favorably, and may God bless you. 

Mr. Harvey M. Dickson (Norfolk). Gentlemen, I am not representing any interest 
in either one of the canals, and I have no particular interest in either city. I am, 
however, in dead earnest in regard to the Atlantic waterways proposition from Cape 
Cod to Beaufort. 

I believe the engineers in the service of the United States Government are thor- 
oughly capable of determining which is the best route to recommend. I do not 
believe that they are going to do any injustice to any section of this country. 

I do not want to see, however, the project blocked by attacking either local or 
personal interest. 



266 IXTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, It. C. 



I have just returned from the convention at Providence, and I want to say to you, 
Mr. Chairman, it is surprising the number of communities, the number of small 
streams, and the number of people who are clamoring for canals and rivers to be 
changed to go by their doors. If the board of engineers that the Government has 
so wisely designated to locate this route is going to be influenced by any locality or 
any conditions other than laid down in the act of Congress, we will never have a 
free waterway. My only interest is in a free waterway. The whole country needs 
it. Not only Elizabeth City — I may say that she deserves a great deal of considera- 
tion for the interest she has taken — but at the resolution committee meeting in Phila- 
delphia last May personal interest entered so largely into it that one man had the 
audacity to introduce a resolution proposing that work should begin immediately on 
the Delaware Canal. Immediately when the resolution was introduced 50 resolu- 
tions were introduced looking to the improvement of each special section from Cape 
Cod to Beaufort. 

I see if we do not bury our personal interest and our local interest we will never 
get a free waterway. 

I believe the people on the Dismal Swamp Canal should not be cut out, but I do not 
believe that the United States Government is going to buy two canals and operate 
two canals. I believe, even if the engineers would recommend it in this district, 
that forthwith there would be loaded on this proposition so many canals and rivers 
and so many improvements that it would cost more than the Panama Canal. 

I believe that this matter should be left to the engineers; I believe that they should 
hew to the line and let the chips fall where they may. If it hurts Xorfolk, it must hurt 
Norfolk; if it hurts Elizabeth City, it must hurt Elizabeth City. The intention and 
purpose of the Atlantic Waterways Association is to give a deeper waterway from Cape 
Cod to Beaufort, and to adopt the most feasible, practicable, and economical route. 
I believe the engineers the Government has put on this work are capable of it. 

Col. Abbot. Is there anybody else to be heard? [Xo response.] I wish to thank 
everyone who has been here present to-day for the assistance that they have given 
the board in their earnest endeavor to get at the bottom facts, upon which we must 
make a decision, the importance of which we all appreciate. I thank everyone who 
has spoken to-day, and I thank all those who have come to support by their presence 
those who were put up to speak for their interests. The meeting is adjourned. 



INTTtACOASTAL WATEEWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOKT, W, O. 267 

Exhibit A. 



Barges. 

S. A. Sands 

Jupiter 

Atlas 

Mars 

Carolina 

Emily Senofleld... 
Emma and Bessie. 

Berks . 

Larmic 

John Smith 

A. McNally 

Keystone 

Celest. McNally... 

Vulcan 

Isabelle 

Saturn 

Mercury 

Schuylkill 

D. E. McNanghton 
Jos. O'Brien 1 

Schooners. 

Edwin and Maud. 

Geo. Gaskins 

Flora Agnes 

Cora Peake 

Eva D. Rose..:... 

A. Von Nivenheim 

J. M. Quillen 

W. T. Parker 

Geo. T. Garrison. . 

Eloise 

Three Poto 

N. C. Dreger 

Annie E Webb... 
Jno. Q. Furguson.. 

Chas. A. Straw 

M. & A. Beswick. . 

W. J. Hagine 

Louise 

Levi H. Phillips. . . 

Tugs. 

Henry Steel 

Mascott 

C. B. Reynolds... 
Helen 

G. G. Mott 

Parole 

Esherick 

Cur tin 

Columbia 

Nettie 

J. J. Fleetwood . . . 

Grit 

Freight steamboats. 

T. S. Taylor 

Annie 

Teddie 

Dennis Simmons. . 

Nita 

T. A. Small 

J. C. Ritchie 



Tons. 




277 


11 


346 


6 


392 


13 


312 


10 


333 


18 


243 


15 


381. 


25 


379 


15 


308 


28 


196 


10 


417 


10 


402 


20 


441 


31 


392 


9 


428 


4 


328 


18 


337 


7 


270 


12 


357 




218 


4 



178 
13 
31 
234 
104 

42 
129 
178 
35 
29 
14 
14 
101 
129 
215 
219 
15 
66 
87 



79 
42 
45 
99 

46 
34 
69 
85 
90 
85 



30 



271 
72 
43 

200 
41 
49 

175 



> m 

<v a 

to 

«= $ 

.2><N 



10 

30 
1 

3 

10 

20 
20 
10 
11 
11 
10 
20 
9 
6 
10 
4 
10 
36 
20 



7 
16 
10 
11 

11 

12 
10 

8 
6 
7 



10 

15 
35 
15 

25* 



3 
o 

u 

M 

"3 



ft 



11 

o 

m 



Remarks. 



Convenient, straight. 
Better waterway. 

Better route ; protected, can perform 
better service. 

Convenient, communication and sup- 
plies. 

Better route, protected. 
Less work. 

Better route, protected. 



Better route, protected, convenient. 
Do. 
Do. 

Straight line. 



Both routes needful* 

Better and more certain passage. 

Less obstruction; Elizabeth City an at- 
traction. 

Do. 

Better and certain passage. 
Safer. 

More convenient. 
More convenient and safer. 
Elizabeth City an attraction. 
Less obstruction. 



More convenient. 
Has town at each end. 



Less injury to wheels. 
Better condition. 
Safer route. 

Convenient for communication and 
supplies. 



Better condition. 
Safer route. 

Approaches better; good country and 
towns. 

Better navigation; convenient. 



Protected route. 
Less delay. 

Straight route; do better work. 
Approaches better. 
Shorter. 



i Prefers Albemarle & Chesapeake, lower tolls, better route, better canal. 



REPORT OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS FOR RIVERS AND HARBORS. 



War Department, 
The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, 

Washington, D. C, December 12, 1911. 
Sir : Having fully considered the report of the special board on the 
surveys made in compliance with the act of March 3, 1909, for the 
construction of a continuous waterway, inland where practicable, 
from Boston, Mass., to Beaufort Inlet, N. C, the Board of Engineers 
for Rivers and Harbors has the honor to submit the following report 
thereon. 

The item of law ordering this investigation and other items affecting 
it are quoted in the report. The waterway is considered under five 
sections, viz: Boston to Narragansett Bay, Narragansett Bay to 
Long Island Sound, New York Bay to Delaware River, Delaware 
River to Chesapeake Bay, Norfolk to Beaufort. 

BOSTON-NARRAGANSETT BAY SECTION. 

Seven possible routes for a waterway through the Boston-Narra- 
gansett Bay section were considered by the special board. The 
results of the surveys showed that two routes were clearly superior 
to all the others, one terminating in Hingham Bay in Boston Harbor 
proper, the other hi Plymouth Harbor. The Hingham Bay route has 
a summit level of 35 feet, requiring 4 locks. On the Plymouth Harbor 
route the waterway can be constructed with a 20-foot summit level, 
requiring 2 locks, but a sea level cut with two tide locks is practicable. 
The line of the two routes mentioned is identical from Narragansett 
Bay to a point near the junction of Taunton and Wenatuxet Rivers. 
Estimates are submitted for channels 18 and 25 feet deep and 125 
and 200 feet bottom width by both routes. The opinions of State, 
county, and municipal authorities and commercial bodies and vessel 
owners were obtained as to the most desirable waterwav, and almost 
without exception the preference was for the Hingham ^Bay terminus 
with 25-foot depth and 200 feet bottom width, although when main- 
tenance is taken into account this is the most costly route and type 
of canal, roughly estimated to cost $40,047,000 for construction and 
$836,000 annually for operation and maintenance. 

The special board reports that in Boston there was little evidence 
of a serious desire for any canal, while great interest was evinced by 
persons living or doing business near the Taunton end. A State 
commission created ' 1 to consider in what manner the Commonwealth 
may best cooperate with the Federal Government and certain other 
States in the development of inland waterways," reported that "The 
conditions of transportation may so change in the future as to make 
such a canal desirable and necessary, but the facts as they now appear 
do not warrant this commission in advocating the present construction 
of the proposed canal." This section of the Intracoastal Waterway 
is at the extreme northern end. Its principal object would be to 

268 



INTHACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, >T. C. 269 



avoid the dangers incident to the outside passage around Cape Cod. 
The special board points out, however, that until the section imme- 
diately to the south is constructed, the dangers of open-sea navigation 
around Point Judith will have to be met by all vessels passing through 
the canal, and this would largely exclude the class of smooth-water 
coal barges, from the use of which most of the economies of transpor- 
tation, via the inland canal, are to be expected. Another condition 
suggesting delay is the probable early completion of the Cape Cod 
Canal by private parties. This canal will have a depth of 25 feet and 
a bottom width of 100 feet. 

The special board concludes as follows: 

At the present time there appears to be no commercial necessity sufficient to justify 
the construction of a canal over either of these inland routes. After other sections of 
the proposed intracoastal waterway have been constructed and after the measure of 
relief to commerce to be afforded by the Cape Cod Ship Canal has been demonstrated, 
the question of the need for a completely sheltered waterway between Narragansett 
Bay and Boston should receive further consideration. 

The economic value of the Cape Cod Canal with its exposed approaches has not 
yet been established. It is not considered advisable for the United States to enter 
into any negotiations looking to the acquisition of this canal at the present time. 
After its completion the question of its acquirement, based on its value as a "going 
concern," may be worthy of further consideration. 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors concurs in the view 
that the construction of this section of the proposed intracoastal water- 
way is not worthy of being undertaken by the General Government 
at the present time. 

NARRAGANSETT BAY LONG ISLAND SOUND SECTION. 

m 

This section of the proposed intracoastal waterway is designed 
to afford protected navigation from Narragansett Bay to Long 
Island Sound. It extends from the west side of Narragansett Bay 
to Fishers Island Sound, following in a general way a natural route 
parallel to the southern coast of Rhode Island through valleys, tidal 
ponds, and across low divides within the towns of North Kingston, 
Narragansett, South Kingston, Charleston, and Westerly. The total 
length of the line between waters of 18 feet depth at the two ends is 
35.6 miles. Several modifications of the route were surveyed, and 
the line selected as most desirable begins at Bisselis Cove, in Narra- 
gansett Bay, and ends at Colonel Willies Cove, in Little Narragansett 
Bay. The estimates are as follows: 

Sea-level canal, Bisselis Cove to Fishers Island Sound, depth 18 feet; bottom width, 
125 feet in land cuts and 250 feet in ponds and approaches, with an auxiliary entrance 
at the mouth of Narrow River, 18 feet in depth and 100 feet bottom width,* with pro- 
tecting jetty extending to 20 feet depth of water at mean low tide in Narragansett 
Bay, $12,322,000. 

Sea-level canal, Bisselis Cove to Fishers Island Sound, depth 25 feet; bottom width, 
200 feet in land cuts and 300 feet in ponds and approaches, with an auxiliary entrance 
at the mouth of Narrow River, 18 feet in depth and 100 feet bottom width, with a 
protecting jetty extending to 20 feet depth of water at mean low water in Narragansett 
Bay, $24,736,635. 

If the State bears the cost of road changes and land damages, the 
cost to the United States will be reduced $590,000 on either of the 
above projects. With its eastern entrance just north of Narragan- 
sett Pier, instead of at Bisselis Cove, the cost of the 18-foot canal is 
placed at $11,399,205 and the cost of the 25-foot canal at $21,864,000, 



270 INTEACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFOET, N. C. 

but on account of the exposed entrance and the reach of open water 
between it and. the protected waters of Narragansett Bay this termi- 
nus was rejected by the special board. The cost of maintenance is 
estimated at $160,000 annually. 

The commerce of the Newport Engineer district during the calen- 
dar year 1908, to and from localities under improvement by the 
United States, is reported at 6,587,177 tons, valued at $215,009,093, 
of which 4,587,763 tons, valued at $26,073,351, was coal and other 
fuel. The commerce entering and leaving Narragansett Bav was 
4,949,262 tons, valued at $170,944,159, while that carried to and 
from points east of Narragansett Bay was 1,637,915 tons, valued at 
$7,574,492. It appears that tows of barges coming through Long 
Island Sound and bound for Narragansett Bay are frequently de- 
tained a considerable time at the eastern end of the sound, and at 
Newport in returning, awaiting favorable weather to make the pas- 
sage. The delays at times amount to a week or more. By increas- 
ing the time of transportation they reduce the number of trips made 
and the amount of commerce carried and render necessary a higher 
freight rate than would be required through a protected route to 
afford a reasonable return on the investment. The passage through 
the exposed portions of the route requires from 12 to 15 hours. 
Changes of weather conditions during this time of transit have caused 
the total loss of many box barges, and the special board believes 
that the elimination of this marine risk would permit a considerable 
further reduction in freight rates. Looking to the future and assum- 
ing the construction of waterways from Chesapeake Bay to Delaware 
River, and from Delaware River to New York Bay, the Rhode Island 
canal would afford a protected way which would permit the use of 
light types of barges and towboats for transportation of coal from 
Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Norfolk to Providence and other Nar- 
ragansett Bay points, in lieu of the expensive barges and seagoing 
tugs now used in this trade. At present the railroads practically 
control the freight movement between New York and Narragansett 
Bay, this being due to a number of causes, among which are their 
control of the deep-water terminals and the large capital required for 
the type of boat needed. A protected waterway would diminish the 
investment required in ships, thus stimulating competition. The 
question of supplying greater public wharf space has already been 
taken up by the municipalities of Providence and New York. 

The opinions of transportation interests are generally in favor of 
the proposed waterway. Some unfavorable views, however, are 
quoted by the special board and include statements from the Board 
of Underwriters of New York, and the Central Railroad of New 
Jersey. The special board states that u the objections offered to 
the construction of the proposed canal seem to be based on the 
theory that the existing means of water transportation are better 
adapted to existing routes than they would be to a canal, without 
consideration of the benefits to be derived from the development of 
an efficient type of vessel, especially suited to canal transportation, 
a vessel of low cost as compared with those built for service on the 
ocean.' ' The depth of the canal has been placed at 18 feet to accom- 
modate freight carriers drawing from 14 to 16 feet. Deeper draft 
vessels can take the outside route with safety. 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 271 

The special board recommends the construction of a canal 18 feet 
deep, at an estimated cost of $12,322,000, but it states that "the full 
benefits to be derived from this section can be obtained only after 
the completion of the sections to the south, and initiation of work 
should follow that on the New Jersey section." It appears that the 
State of Rhode Island has undertaken to provide a free right of 
way for the canal, as far as an appropriation of $500,000 will permit, 
and the special board recommends that the State be requested to 
take such further steps as may be necessary to change the location 
of highways and roads as outlined in the report, the cost of the 
bridges only to be borne by the United States. 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors is unable to take 
as favorable a view as that expressed by the special board relative 
to the commercial benefits to be expected from this waterway. It 
affords practically no saving in distance over the outside route, and 
boats would probably prefer the latter except in stormy weather. 
This appears to be the least needed link in the waterway from Boston 
to Beaufort. The tonnage as given in the special board's estimates 
is much less than in the section adjoining Boston, and the exposure 
of the outside route is also less. It is very questionable whether 
the inside route would be used sufficiently to warrant the large 
expenditure required for its construction and maintenance. The 
board, therefore, not only concurs in the view that the construction 
of this section of the Intracoastal Waterway should not be under- 
taken at the present time but also believes it is inadvisable to com- 
mit the Government now to a definite project for its execution at 
any future time. Accordingly the board does not recommend ap- 
proval of this section or any procedure by the State of Rhode Island 
in connection with the right of way. 

NEW YORK BAY DELAWARE RIVER SECTION. 

All practical routes for this section of the proposed Intracoastal 
Waterway were considered by the special board, and an investiga- 
tion was made of the existing Delaware & Raritan Canal with a 
view of determining whether this canal could be altered and adapted 
to modern requirements. The main canal now has a surface width 
of about 80 feet, a bottom width of 50 feet and a depth of 9 feet. 
The depth on the miter sills of locks is 7J feet. The canal is crossed 
twice by the main line of the Pennsylvania Railroad at points where 
the conditions render it impracticable to make the necessary changes 
of grade without enormous expense. At Trenton it is also crossed 
by 11 draw bridges. The interruptions to street traffic by the small 
existing canal navigation are a cause of annoyance and loss to both 
land and water commerce, and with an enlarged canal carrying a 
heavy commerce the conditions would be intolerable. For these 
and other reasons the special board decided that the adoption of 
this line would not be economical or advantageous. Another line 
considered was that recommended in 1895 by a committee appointed 
by the city of Philadelphia. This route extends from Bordentown 
to the Raritan River near its mouth, and was rejected by the special 
board, after a rough survey had been made of it, because of the 
many railroad crossings, the rock formation encountered, and the 
greater cost as compared with a similar canal on a route farther east. 



272 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

The route selected as most desirable runs from Bordentown, N. J., 
in a general northeasterly direction to Karitan Bay at the town of 
Morgan. The length of the line across New Jersey is 33.7 miles. 
The route is suitable for a sea-level canal or for a lock canal, having a 
summit level of 70 feet. The special board believes that the canal, 
to have commercial value, should have a bottom width of at least 125 
feet. The question of the most advantageous depth was considered, 
and the opinion reached that a canal which would join the North and 
South Atlantic seaboards and connect directly two cities of such great 
importance as New York and Philadelphia, if worth building at all, 
should have dimensions sufficient to permit boats of from 2,000 to 
3,000 tons capacity to traverse it at a fair rate of speed. A boat of 
the latter capacity would draw about 16 feet loaded, and a depth of 
at least 18 feet was therefore considered essential. It was found, 
however, that the difference in the estimates of cost for canals 18 
feet and 25 feet in depth was comparatively small, and, moreover, it 
was thought that if the canal should be constructed with an 18-foot 
depth there would be within a few years an imperative demand for 
an increase of depth. The special board therefore recommends that 
the canal depth should be fixed at 25 feet and that the approaches in 
New York Bay and in the Delaware Kiver, as far as Bordentown, 
should have channels with a central depth of 25 feet for a width of 
100 feet, and a depth of 18 feet for a width of 300 feet. It is proposed 
also to construct a branch channel in the Delaware Kiver from Bor- 
dentown to Trenton, having a depth of 18 feet for a width of 150 feet. 

The time required to pass through a sea-level canal would be less 
than through a lock canal, and the former type is advocated almost 
unanimously by commercial interests. Considering the cost of water 
supply for a summit-level canal and the expense of maintenance, the 
estimates made by the special board show but little difference between 
the cost of the two types, and the board therefore decided in favor of 
the sea-level canal. The total cost of a sea-level canal 25 feet deep 
at extreme low water and 125 feet wide, with approach channels as 
described above, is estimated at $45,000,000, and the cost of annual 
maintenance at $312,217. The State of New Jersey has undertaken 
to expend not to exceed $500,000 toward providing a right of way 
for the canal. 

The commerce to be benefited by the proposed waterway is of 
great magnitude and importance. Not only will the canal afford a 
protected route for the commerce passing between the two great 
industrial centers of New York and Philadelphia, but also for the 
commerce of many miles of waterways south of Philadelphia and north 
of New York. Other benefits and advantages claimed for this section 
of the waterway are the utilization of economical types of boats in 
place of the expensive vessels and barges now used for the transporta- 
tion of coal and lumber northward via the outside route, where many 
disasters to shipping and heavy loss of life and property have occurred; 
the large direct saving in cost of transporting heavy commodities, and 
the indirect saving due to the influence of the waterway on rail rates; 
the amelioration of the congestion of traffic which frequently exists 
on the rail lines in this vicinity ; the affording of an additional avenue 
for the transportation of necessities of life to the important cities 



IN TR AC ASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 273 



concerned, reducing the liability of suffering and loss from physical, 
commercial, or political disturbances. It is estimated that the annual 
commerce on this waterway for the first few years would amount to 
about 5,600,000 tons, and that there would be an average saving m 
freight rates of about 40 cents per ton. 

In conclusion the special board recommends a sea-level canal 25 
feet in depth; but it believes u that the construction of this section of 
the canal should be deferred until after the construction of the two 
more southerly sections, and until the United States plant now at 
work in the Panama Canal shall be made available." 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors considers it 
improbable that the commercial benefits of this deep-draft sea-level 
canal across the State of New Jersey would be commensurate with 
the very large expenditure proposed. The total length of the channel 
to be constructed, omitting the Trenton spur, is about 71.8 miles. 
Even assuming the estimate of 5,600,000 tons of commerce through 
this channel, the interest at 3 per cent on the cost of construction and 
the expense of maintenance would amount to about 30 cents per 
ton, or 4 mills per ton-mile, which is a heavy charge for the public to 
assume for the benefit of shippers. The apparent advantage of the 
canal over a double-track freight railroad, shown by the special board, 
is based on the use of both to their maximum capacity, viz., approxi- 
mately 100,000,000 tons per year for the railroad and 1,280,000,000 
tons for the canal. For the expected traffic of 5,600,000 tons, or 
even for a considerably larger tonnage, this advantage would disap- 
pear. The principal estimates for a saving by the inside route are 
based on calculations for 1,000 and 2,000 ton barges, and either of 
these can be accommodated on a depth of 12 feet. * * * 

This board concurs with the special board in the opinion that the 
value of the New York Bay-Delaware River section is largely depend- 
ent on the opening of communicating waterways to the south. The 
recommendation that its construction be deferred until after the 
completion of the two more southerly sections, and until the United 
States plant now at work in the Panama Canal shall become available, 
necessarily involves postponement for a number of years, during 
which time commercial and transportation conditions may undergo 
changes affecting more or less the present findings. Accordingly this 
board does not recommend the present adoption of a project for a 
25-foot canal in this section. Furthermore, it is not convinced that 
a canal of much less depth would not adequately meet the demands 
of commerce, and believes that estimates of the cost of a canal 12 
feet deep should be secured, which can be done without additional 
congressional action. Pending such investigation, action by the 
State of New Jersey with a view to changing the location of highways 
and roads and authorizing changes in railroad locations should be 
postponed. 

DELAWARE RIVER— CHESAPEAKE BAY SECTION. 

The construction of a ship canal connecting Delaware River and 
Chesapeake Bay has heretofore been considered by the General Gov- 
ernment as an independent proposition. Communication between 

22739° — H. Doc. 391, 62-2 18 



274 INTKACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



these two bodies of water for light-draft boats is now afforded by the 
Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, a private waterway charging tolls. 
The canal is 36 feet wide at the bottom and 10 feet deep, 13.5 miles 
long, with a summit level of 16 feet, and contains three locks 220 
.feet long by 24 feet wide in the clear. Due to its restricted dimen- 
sions and the tolls charged for its use, the commerce through it is 
not proportional to that of the bodies of water which it connects. 
. All possible routes were considered by the special board, and for 
reasons fully explained, the opinion was reached that the most avail- 
able route lies substantially along the line of the present Chesapeake 
and Delaware Canal, and a survey of this route was therefore made. 
The present terminus of the canal at Delaware City is not well adapted 
to enlargement, and the plan presented provides for a new entrance 
at Reedy Point, though retaining the Delaware City arm as a branch 
canal for the use of light-draft boats. From the point of junction of 
the new entrance and the present canal, the proposed waterway fol- 
lows closely the line of the existing cut. The law ordering this inves- 
tigation prescribes 25 feet as the maximum depth to be considered. 
The special board states that this depth would permit nearly all of 
the coastwise water-borne traffic now plying between Baltimore and 
ports of the northern Atlantic coast, and also a large part of the for- 
eign commerce of Baltimore with Canadian and European ports to 
use the canal advantageously. It is stated that a depth of 18 feet 
would permit few of these vessels to utilize the canal. The actual 
saving in first cost of the 18-foot canal as compared with the 25-foot 
canal is placed at about $700,000, and as this saving is not regarded 
as sufficient to justify the sacrifice of the benefits expected from the 
greater depth, final estimates are submitted only for the larger proj- 
ect. In considering the most suitable type of canal, the special 
board found that a tide-level canal would be cheaper to construct, 
operate, and maintain than a lock canal, on account of the large and 
expensive locks that would be required for the character of commerce 
involved, and the necessity of constructing a pumping plant to supply 
water to the summit level. No damage to banks or interference with 
navigation is apprehended on account of tidal currents, and it is 
thought that a guard lock will not be required. The estimates are 
as follows: 

Tide-level canal 25 feet deep at mean low water, 125 feet bottom 

width $9,910,210.00 

Estimated value of the existing Chesapeake & Delaware Canal 2, 514, 289. 70 

12, 424, 499. 70 

Initial cost of plant for maintenance 375, 400. 00 

Annual cost of maintenance 104, 220. 00 

The Delaware River-Chesapeake Bay Canal is an essential part of 
any through inland waterway connecting New York or Philadelphia 
with the South, and the enlarged canal would also be of value in 
connection with existing waterways and their commerce. It would 
enable many vessels bound to and from Baltimore to avoid the 
dangers of the outside route between Cape Charles and Cape Henlo- 
pen, where many wrecks have occurred; it would save a distance oi 
184 miles between the latter point and Baltimore, involving a sub- 
stantial saving in cost of vessel operation ; and as a result of economies 
effected in methods and routes of transportation it would produce a 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 275 

considerable saving in freight charges. These savings for a free 
canal 25 feet deep, based entirely on existing commerce and from 
incomplete returns, are estimated by the special board to amount to 
$1,414,242 annually. In the opinion of the special board "the 
importance of this section is deemed sufficient to warrant the imme- 
diate purchase of the existing canal and the inception of work for its 
enlargement as soon as funds can be made available." Condemna- 
tion proceedings are recommended in case the holdings of the Chesa- 
peake & Delaware Canal Co. can not be bought for $2,514,289.70 
or less. 

The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors concurs with the 
special board as to the desirability of a free waterway connecting 
Delaware River and Chesapeake Bay. Aside from its future value 
as a link in a through waterway connecting northern and southern 
ports, it will be of great value to existing commerce, and will yield 
immediate benefits. The board therefore recommends the purchase 
of the Chesapeake & Delaware Canal at a price not exceeding 
$2,514,289.70, or its acquirement by condemnation proceedings if 
necessary. It believes that the question of the enlargement of this 
canal should receive further study with a view to determining whether 
a less depth than that proposed by the special board would not 
adequately meet the requirements of commerce and navigation, and 
recommends the preparation of an estimate of the cost of a 12-foot 
canal, which is the depth recommended by the special board, as well 
as by this board, for the Norfolk-Beaufort section. This can be done 
under the present authorization. 

NORFOLK-BEAUFORT SECTION. 

For convenient consideration the special board separates this sec- 
tion of the intracoastal waterway into three divisions: First, Norfolk 
to Albemarle Sound; second, Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound; 
third, Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Harbor. 

Norfolk to Albemarle Sound. — Protected navigation between Nor- 
folk and Albemarle Sound was first afforded by the construction of 
the Dismal Swamp Canal, and later by the construction of the Albe- 
marle & Chesapeake Canal. The fact that all commerce passing 
through these waterways was subject to tolls early attracted attention 
to the desirability of a Government-owned free waterway, and this 
question has been the subject of several reports and investigations. 
The most recent of these was made in compliance with the act of 
March 3, 1905, which ordered an examination of the Norfolk-Beaufort 
waterway. The report recommended the construction of a 12-foot 
waterway between the points named. The improvement of the part 
between Pamlico Sound and Beaufort Inlet to a depth of 10 feet was 
adopted by the act of March 2, 1907, andHhe canal has been built. 

Four routes for the Norfolk-Albemarle Sound division are consid- 
ered possible and practicable by the special board, as follows : (1) The 
Dismal Swamp Canal route; (2) the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal 
route; (3) the Cooper Creek route ; (4) the New Cooper Creek route. 

Route No. 4 is a modification of Route No. 3. It appears that 
there is no source of water supply which would be adequate for a 
lock canal with a summit level, unless costly pumping plants be 
installed, and for this and other reasons the special board believes 



276 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 



that the waterway should be a sea-level canal. The plans submitted 
are for canals 12 and 16 feet deep ; having bottom widths of 90 feet 
through dry land, 125 feet in narrow parts of rivers, 250 feet in wide 
portions of rivers, in bays and entrances to them, and in Currituck 
Sound, and 300 feet in open sounds and across bars in North River. 
The estimates are as follows: 



Route. 



Depth, 16 
feet. 



1. Dismal Swamp Canal route 

2. Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal route 

3. Cooper Creek route 

4. New Cooper Creek route 



$7, 072, 600 
4,178,930 
5, 326, 000 
5, 100, 100 



The above estimates for routes 1 and 2 include the cost of acquiring 
the existing private canals, which is $1,750,000 for the Dismal Swamp 
Canal and $500,000 for the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal. 

The act of June 25, 1910, authorizes the Secretary of War to enter 
into negotiations for the purchase as a part of the inland waterway 
of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, or the Dismal Swamp Canal, 
and to make a contract for the purchase of either of said canals and 
appurtenances, subject to further ratification and appropriation by 
Congress : 

Provided, That no contract for the purchase of either of said canals shall be made 
unless such purchase, after full hearing of all parties in interest, is recommended in 
the survey report to be hereafter submitted in compliance with the directions of 
Congress in the river and harbor act approved March third, nineteen hundred and 
nine. 

A hearing was given by the special board at Norfolk on September 
6, 1910, and a careful study of the advantages and disadvantages of 
the several routes has been made. The conclusion is reached that 
the most desirable route is that via the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, 
and recommendation is made that this route be selected and improved 
by the United States to a depth of 12 feet: 

Provided, That all property and rights of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal can 
be acquired for not exceeding five hundred thousand dollars. 

Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound. — A number of routes were con- 
sidered for the stretch from Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound, and 

estimates are given as follows : 



Route. 



Croatan Sound 

Long Shoal 

Far Creek r 

Juniper Bay # 

Rose Bay 

Pungo River 

Modified Fungo Rivr 



Depth, 16 
feet. 



$2,372,000 
2,912,000 
3,006,000 
4,099,000 
3,441,780 
3,287,000 
3,390,000 



The estimates for the Long Shoal, Far Creek, and Juniper Bay 
routes each include $1,000,000 for the cost of a necessary harbor of 
refuge at Pamlico Sound entrance. 

After consideration of all the engineering and commercial factors 
involved, the special board recommends that a depth of 12 feet be 



INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON, MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 277 



given this section of the waterway and that the Rose Bay route be 
adopted. While the cost of this route for the 12-foot canal is con- 
siderably greater than the Croatan Sound route, the conditions are 
more favorable for economical maintenance and for the enlargement 
of the canal if required in the future. 

Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Inlet. — As stated above, this section is 
now under improvement by the United States to a depth of 10 feet, 
and the special board recommends that the channel be deepened to 
12 feet at mean low water at an estimated cost of $397,500, conform- 
ing to the depth recommended for other divisions of this section. 
The dredging of Brant Shoal to a similar depth, in order to afford the 
necessary connection between this stretch and the one immediately 
north, is also recommended at an estimated cost of $54,000. 

Some of the reasons which influenced the special board to recom- 
mend the 12-foot depth at the present time for the Norfolk-Beaufort 
section of the intracoastal waterway are as follows: This depth is at 
least as great as that available at all the North Carolina shipping 
points to and from which practically all the local commerce will be 
carried; it is greater than that now available in existing inland water- 
ways south of Norfolk; it will be sufficient for boats and barges 
much larger than those now in use and large enough to permit the 
economical handling and transportation of cargoes of the class that 
will probably be carried on the waterway; it is sufficient for the 
smaller vessels of the Navy and for many sound, bay, and river 
steamers which might be used as transports; and under the plan pro- 
posed a greater depth can be readily and economically provided if 
in future the needs of commerce justify such enlargement. 

The estimated costs of the improvements proposed in this section 
are summarized as follows: 

12-foot depth. 

Norfolk to Albemarle Sound: Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal route $2, 733, 300 

Albemarle Sound to Pamlico Sound : Rose Bay route 2, 216, 780 

Brant Shoal Cut 54, 000 

Pamlico Sound to Beaufort Inlet via Adams Creek Canal 397, 500 

Total 5, 401, 580 

The special board recommends a 12-foot canal along the above 
route and expresses the opinion — 

that the commercial necessities in this section, as well as the comparatively low cost 
of the canal, warrant the immediate purchase of the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal 
and the inception of work on the enlargement and extension recommended without 
delay. 

In connection with the purchase of this canal the special board 
states : 

Attention is especially invited to the fact that if the above recommendation of the 
board be approved, and if the Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal be purchased by the 
United States, the business of the now competing Dismal Swamp Canal will probably 
be practically ruined . While it is understood that for such indirect damage done to 
the canal company it has no legal redress, it is thought proper to invite the attention 
of Congress to the condition which will then exist. 

As stated above, a project for a 12-foot waterway between Norfolk 
and Beaufort was recommended in a former report on this subject. 
At that time, as well as in all previous discussions, this portion 
of the intracoastal waterway was considered as a separate propo- 
sition, but now its importance to general through commerce is 



278 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY BOSTON", MASS., TO BEAUFORT, N. C. 

enhanced by reason of the possible development of a free waterway 
affording protected navigation at least as far north as Delaware 
River. As stated in its former reports, the Board of Engineers for 
Rivers and Harbors considers it extremely doubtful whether any 
considerable portion of the ocean-borne commerce between north 
and south Atlantic ports will be diverted to this inland route. The 
inland route, however, now carries a commerce of importance, though 
it is hampered by tolls, and, with the enlarged free canal now pro- 
posed, increased commerce and widespread benefits are to be 
expected. For these reasons, this board concurs with the special 
board regarding the advisability of the construction of a waterway 
12 feet in depth between Norfolk and Beaufort Inlet. In connection 
with its stud} 7 of this matter the board made an inspection of the 
Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal and the Dismal Swamp Canal and 
held advertised hearings at Norfolk and Elizabeth City, at which all 
parties having an interest in the subject under discussion were 
afforded opportunity to be heard. The conclusions of this board 
regarding the most desirable route coincide with those of the special 
board, and it is recommended that the necessary steps be taken for 
the immediate purchase of the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal 
and for the completion of the Norfolk-Beaufort section of the intra- 
coastal waterway in accordance with the project proposed by the 
special board, at an estimated cost of $5,401,580. 

The special board discusses the military and naval uses of an intra- 
coastal waterway. The Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors 
has carefully considered these features and recognizes the benefits 
that such a waterway would afford in these respects. It does not 
appear, however, that these benefits are such as to warrant any 
modification of the conclusions expressed above. 

In compliance with law, the board reports that there are no ques- 
tions of terminal facilities, water power, or other subjects so related 
to the project proposed that they may be coordinated therewith to 
lessen the cost and compensate the Government for expenditures 
made in the interests of navigation. 

For the board. 

Very respectfully, Wm. T. Rossell, 

Colonel, Corps of Engineers, 
Senior Member of the Board. 

The Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army. 



o